Dark Souls 2 Lighting changes/Downgrade

zephervack

Member
Apr 12, 2010
7,162
1
0
Canada
www.neogaf.com
Absolutely gutted by the response from Brad and other "journalists", my guess is that they didnt even take the time to watch the videos/gifs/pics and are just assuming we are complaining over something silly.

We are probably not even getting 30 seconds of their attention.
 

Future PhaZe

Member
Oct 4, 2007
26,272
0
0
Patrick and Brad

.


Pretty damn shameful. liking the game is one thing but ignoring a false advertising case and calling people crazy or "happens all the time" like it is nothing because you like the series is just sad.

Gaming journalism is a complete joke nowadays because of this.
fucking terrible
 

Kai Dracon

Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Jun 7, 2004
19,552
1
0
45
Space is the Place
I get the fact they perhaps prepared next-gen lighting etc that wont work on Last gen systems, but since I havent bought the game, does it at least compare to darksouls 1, graphically?
Basically yes. Some areas are better. Some don't look as good as they could since they were built with the better lighting integrated into the art, which has been turned off.

But I don't think anything I've seen so far looks worse than DS1.
 

Morrigan Stark

Arrogant Smirk
Jul 23, 2010
31,070
6
720
www.metal-archives.com
ENB still hasn't commented on the lighting situation despite his earlier comments, and he's been active on twitter just a few hours ago.
I don't know what you people imagine pestering Vaati and ENB will achieve.
They don't work for Bamco or FROM.
Seriously. Why are people hounding these two random Youtubers? Pester Namco or From, not these guys.

LOTS OF ANGRY YELLING WHARRGARBL
Jesus, calm down. Yes, the downgrade is disappointing. But you know what? I played about 12 hours yesterday and I'm having a blast. I'm only noticing the flat grey walls because I remembered the GAF comparison screenshots. And when I light torches it looks pretty good. Probably not as good as the initial reveal, but it helps, and when I'm playing I don't have another screen next to me showing the comparison so I think "whoa this looks neat".

Maybe I'm easy to please. But when I'm playing, this really takes a back seat to everything else. And many times I actually think "this game looks good", the exterior environments in particular are gorgeous.

Then I come back to this thread, see the comparison screenshots and it kind of hurts. And I wonder why I keep hurting myself. I should go back and play some more Dark Souls II.

But the frame rate is still supposedly poor :/
It's fine for the most part, in my experience. It's actually kind of weak in the beginning, for some reason, but once you reach past Majula it seems fairly stable in my experience. I am not that far into the game though. Maybe the Blighttown equivalent is coming up...
 

Morrigan Stark

Arrogant Smirk
Jul 23, 2010
31,070
6
720
www.metal-archives.com
Absolutely gutted by the response from Brad and other "journalists", my guess is that they didnt even take the time to watch the videos/gifs/pics and are just assuming we are complaining over something silly.

We are probably not even getting 30 seconds of their attention.
I have to agree that it's stupid to dismiss GAF as "crazy" here. The downgrade is very, very blatant when you compare the two. I do think it's crazy to overreact and cancel pre-orders based on graphics, considering the first two games aren't exactly known for their technical prowess anyway. I get the disappointment, but the foaming at the mouth is a bit too much.

Still, Namco and/or From do have some explaining to do and game journalists definitely should follow up on this. It's their friggin' job.
 

Future PhaZe

Member
Oct 4, 2007
26,272
0
0
I have to agree that it's stupid to dismiss GAF as "crazy" here. The downgrade is very, very blatant when you compare the two. I do think it's crazy to overreact and cancel pre-orders based on graphics, considering the first two games aren't exactly known for their technical prowess anyway. I get the disappointment, but the foaming at the mouth is a bit too much.

Still, Namco and/or From do have some explaining to do and game journalists definitely should follow up on this. It's their friggin' job.
Passing this off as just "graphics" is completely missing the point that the lighting was ADVERTISED by FROM as a key element to the gameplay!!!!!
 

Blargonaut

Banned
Dec 13, 2013
9,984
0
0
You guys are acting like someone is forcing you to buy it.

If it doesn't meet your expectations, don't get it and move on.

There are a ton of other games worthy of cash.

What you don't seem to understand is that the people who've already "voted" with their wallets did so under blatantly false advertising. Yes, no one forced us to buy it, but what we bought is INFERIOR, without us even knowing it was inferior.

The majority of people who have already bought the game or pre-ordered it were not informed of this downgrade before release. This downgrade was only hinted at, but the evidence was mostly inconclusive until people actually got Dark Souls 2 in their consoles and in front of their eyeballs.

It's too late for some of us to "not get it and move on". We were misled and had false expectations. The thing to do now is to increase exposure of this downgrade and make FROM, Namco-Bandai, some reviewers and retailers to stop using the old footage to advertise the game, because that's misleading, and so other people can have fairer representation of the current game to base their purchase call on.

That lack of a prior statement AND the current silent treatment from FROM and Namco-Bandai is the crux, nexus, pivot and focus of this 'fanaticism'.

And a lot of us here seem to like the Souls games. A ton of other games existing has nothing to do with this issue. We're trying to figure out THIS game.




Am I making this sound like a bigger problem than it is? I feel like I'm the only one who feels like this is a big issue. This whole situation just bugs me.
 

Future PhaZe

Member
Oct 4, 2007
26,272
0
0
Am I making this sound like a bigger problem than it is? I feel like I'm the only one who feels like this is a big issue. This whole situation just bugs me.
we'll have to keep screaming until they give voice to our concerns blarg

its completely unacceptable
 

CountAntonius

Member
Jul 30, 2010
26,787
1
0
Southern California
Just curious if From came out and said the obvious.

"We had to remove much of the lighting to make the game playable on current gen consoles."

Would people be happy? I mean that's all if anything this will actually lead to. Which is not to say it shouldn't happen because it should have been acknowledged prior to release but now that's it's too late for that is this all people want?

Am I making this sound like a bigger problem than it is? I feel like I'm the only one who feels like this is a big issue. This whole situation just bugs me.
No, but I think your use of bold lettering, italics and underlines are a bit dramatic lol.
 

mnannola

Member
Oct 3, 2009
3,513
0
0
Not sure if everyone saw Brad's post about this HERE


I think he is coming from the view that the game looks as good or better than the other souls games, but I don't think anyone is arguing that point. The problem is the game looks significantly different from previews, and it seems like no one cares to get an answer from the developer about why this happened.
 

Grief.exe

Member
Jul 11, 2012
43,857
0
0
Denver
backloggery.com
This is correct. I used to work for an ad agency (now in a marketing/PR agency - similar world of business) and without a doubt 99.999999999% of game stations are PCs. Unless you see the console, then by default you should assume it's a computer.

I'm not condoning, or condemning any actions; but this is the reality. Of recent note, late last year and before release date, Sony showed off the PS4 in several comic conventions. You could wait in line and try the controller and play a demo. But what most people don't know is that they didn't have any working consoles (with a working OS); it was a big fat computer (which I assume is a sort of dev kit).

source: my eyes.

The industry has been doing this since its inception. Its the video equivalent of "bullshots." I just tossed away my PS2 era Official Playstation Magazines, but not before I quickly scanned through them - and there was a 4 page spread of the original Devil May Cry. I swear to God Almighty those screenshots were better than the HD version of the game. And don't forget stuff like this:




Now, I'd argue that FROM didn't screw up, plus they're most likely not allowed to talk to consumers (that's what PR is for), and instead the marketers for this game aggressively showed off the PC version to win over some purchases. Lying? Sure. Have you seen what a big mac looks like in the ads?

Don't get me wrong, I'm kinda miffed my copy of the game doesn't look like that, but I'm still realistic and would agree with most reasons why the final game doesn't look as advertised.
But that's the thing. The final game DOES look good. The draw distance, the cloth, the open(ish) world, and the ambient lighting is cohesive (though not as stark as some of the old previews).
And what's most important, the game plays like a dream. I absolutely love it, and am excited to find all the secrets it has in store.
Thanks for corroborating our theories.

I really don't blame these publishers, why show off the console version at all? When you have an objectively better version just sitting there.
 

pa22word

Member
Oct 24, 2010
11,062
0
0
Has anyone tried bringing this to sterling's attention? Considering he just did that video on target renders and the rest of the press' complete apathy I think he might be the only one in the industry who's going to actually give a fuck.
 

Morrigan Stark

Arrogant Smirk
Jul 23, 2010
31,070
6
720
www.metal-archives.com
Passing this off as just "graphics" is completely missing the point that the lighting was ADVERTISED by FROM as a key element to the gameplay!!!!!
There are still places where the torch is necessary to progress, and, in my case, I prefer to actually light the torches even when they're not strictly necessary because I do see better (my gamma is turned way down). *shrugs* It's gimped but it's still there.

And stop kidding yourself, most people are only bitching about graphics. All these comments about N64/PS1 graphics (lol), the textures, the colours, the "I'll wait for the PC version" (you really think the same areas in the PC version will suddenly require torch to progress, gameplay wise? don't kid yourself, it'll look better but gameplay won't be affected I'm sure), etc.

I get being disappointed if you thought the whole game was going to be like Tomb of the Giants. Hell, I was interested by that too, but they obviously changed their mind here. I don't think it's about technical reasons in this case because there are still areas like TotG, and obviously they could successfully do TotG in Dark Souls 1. The downgrade is a graphical/technical issue, the choice of pitch-blackness-or-not is most probably an artistic or design one.
 

Fried Food

Banned
Mar 11, 2012
8,028
1
0
Funny that Brad shoemaker says we are crazy. On the bombcast he admitted to not having seen the graphics comparisons and yet he calls us crazy. Great journalistic integrity right there. Vinny said "there was something there" in regards to the graphics comparison. That's putting it lightly, anyone with eyes can see that the lighting was downgraded. Lol Brad calls us crazy over something he hasn't even seen. Well if they lighting looks good to him then thats all that matters right?

Also, I'm loving the game.
 

dan2026

Member
Jul 10, 2012
11,222
1
0
If I were you guys I's be complaining more that the devs said that Dark Souls 2 wouldn't drop below 30fps like Dark Souls 1 did.

When the PS3 version spends most of its time fluctuating below 30fps.
The Xbox version is quite a bit better.

But still the devs told an outright lie in this case.
 

CountAntonius

Member
Jul 30, 2010
26,787
1
0
Southern California
Funny that Brad shoemaker says we are crazy. On the bombcast he admitted to not having seen the graphics comparisons and yet he calls us crazy. Great journalistic integrity right there. Vinny said "there was something there" in regards to the graphics comparison. That's putting it lightly, anyone with eyes can see that the lighting was downgraded. Lol Brad calls us crazy over something he hasn't even seen. Well if they lighting looks good to him then thats all that matters right?
This is what he actually meant. Just for clarification.
I never said there's no difference, rather that people were acting crazy about it when they hadn't even played the game, which is par for the course on this forum. Since then I've been Twitter bombed and had my integrity and intelligence called into question multiple times. In my mind that just further proves my point.

At 15 hours into DS2, I can only think of one area that doesn't look as good as or better than everything I've seen in the previous games, and on top of that it's an exceptionally good game. If that's not enough for the people who are raging about the preview footage, it's their prerogative not to play it, but they're seriously missing out.



Not sure which ring you guys are talking about -- what was the context of the discussion? May have been DS2's equivalent of the
Cling Ring
from Demon's Souls.
 

Gbraga

Member
Aug 6, 2009
23,747
0
0
Just curious if From came out and said the obvious.

"We had to remove much of the lighting to make the game playable on current gen consoles."

Would people be happy? I mean that's all if anything this will actually lead to. Which is not to say it shouldn't happen because it should have been acknowledged prior to release but now that's it's too late for that is this all people want?



No, but I think your use of bold lettering, italics and underlines are a bit dramatic lol.
I would, because that would pretty much confirm that the PC version was still intact. They can't say the only reason they removed was performance issues on PS3 and then not deliver it on PC.

If they say something like "people didn't like the torch" though, then we're screwed.
 

Servbot24

Banned
Feb 14, 2012
30,486
0
0
Austin, TX
www.ianbarkerart.com
This is a pretty good comparison.
In that case the retail version looks better.

Except you have PS Access playing and advertising the game 2 MONTHS before release in a version that wasn't to be. Not 6 months, not 1 year, not 2 years - 2 fucking months. Are you seriously saying there's nothing off about that ?
I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying very few people will notice or care. In fact quite a few will be happy that the game won't be all tomb of Giants.
 

Grief.exe

Member
Jul 11, 2012
43,857
0
0
Denver
backloggery.com
Has anyone tried bringing this to sterling's attention? Considering he just did that video on target renders and the rest of the press' complete apathy I think he might be the only one in the industry who's going to actually give a fuck.
Good point, I made a tweet to him. If you want to help, Retweet, or make your own post to further get the point across.

EDIT:

https://twitter.com/Grief_exe/status/443857759629369345

 

CheesecakeRecipe

Stormy Grey
Mar 27, 2012
11,636
0
0
Good point, I made a tweet to him. If you want to help, Retweet, or make your own post to further get the point across.

https://twitter.com/Grief_exe/status/443856463857852416

I see no @ in that tweet, griefy~

Am I making this sound like a bigger problem than it is? I feel like I'm the only one who feels like this is a big issue. This whole situation just bugs me.
Not at all, that's why this topic is here in the first place. I do think that the bolding and underlining is overdramatizing things slightly but you are in no way out of line with your posts. Feel free to continue and disregard anyone trying to hush you.
 

CountAntonius

Member
Jul 30, 2010
26,787
1
0
Southern California
I would, because that would pretty much confirm that the PC version was still intact. They can't say the only reason they removed was performance issues on PS3 and then not deliver it on PC.

If they say something like "people didn't like the torch" though, then we're screwed.
I personally didn't like the thought of needing a torch for a large part of the game imo. I want the fancy lighting but I don't want a large part of the game to be Tomb of Giants.

That's a poor statement that people keep making. If you watch the comparison video it's obvious that far more than the lighting was changed.
And if more was changed it was for the same reason to get it working on consoles.
 

UrbanRats

Member
Jun 25, 2009
40,860
0
730
How is it acceptable to keep using a vertical slice as promotional material up to something like 1 or 2 months from release? Especially when said misleading vertical slice had pretty big gameplay implications (the need to use a torch to see in the pitch black darkness).

Also, i'm sure everybody uses vertical slices and demos to show off the game in early phases, but it's been a while since i've seen something so drastically different.

Of course, we'll see once the PC version is out, how that will fare.
 

swazzyswess

Member
Oct 10, 2013
1,044
0
0
There are still places where the torch is necessary to progress, and, in my case, I prefer to actually light the torches even when they're not strictly necessary because I do see better (my gamma is turned way down). *shrugs* It's gimped but it's still there.
Yeah, what's weird is the in-game gamma setting is different than the pre-game gamma adjusting you're prompted to do. After I adjusted the gamma in game, some areas have been dark enough that lighting the torches has definitely improved my ability to see enemies hiding out in the corners, for example. Plus, I just think it looks cool to walk through an area again after a bunch of torches have been lit.
 

xPhinehas

Member
Jun 7, 2013
415
0
0
Minnesota, USA
Question, I never played DaS1 on consoles, how do the graphics compare with DaS2? Because frankly...it looks bad, I'll still enjoy the game greatly but not because of the graphics. I'm also getting it on PC when it comes out. Just wondering if it will looks as good as (Durante) PC DaS1.
 

bidaum

Member
Mar 12, 2010
276
0
0
Now, I'd argue that FROM didn't screw up, plus they're most likely not allowed to talk to consumers (that's what PR is for), and instead the marketers for this game aggressively showed off the PC version to win over some purchases.
After everything's said and done, for better or worse, I sure hope that's what the PC version will look like...
 

Floex

Member
Dec 17, 2011
2,966
0
0
So I've just started the game

Ok, I'm not going to deny it doesn't take a hit but I'm happy to say it looks much better than Dark Souls 1. I took a quick shot with my phone (I know, contard right?) of somewhere near the start and personally I think it looks stunning.



It's the flame mechanics that are the disappointment. They feel more like lights than a flame flickering in the dark. There's a bit at the start, again not really a spoiler, you can see from the cut scene a completely different lighting setup as to the in-game one. I truly hope we get to see the original version. If the PC version does turn out to have the superior lighting then I think I will sell on but for now it's not the doom and gloom I was expecting.
 
Jun 6, 2010
1,595
0
0
Give it a rest, for goodness sake.

Kameo was a showcase of next-gen technology: geometry instancing, HDR dynamic lighting (even has a day-night cycle), parallax mapping, detail mapping, fur shading, interactive water surfaces, tons of particle effects / sprites on screen at once and even a split screen coop mode.

Seriously, in its current form DS2 barely looks like a 360 launch game and it runs poorly:

 

Peagles

Member
Sep 28, 2010
6,242
0
0
The PS3 footage shown in January this year, of the Dragon Mansion, also had stripped down polygons and textures but still had that lighting system in tact.

I've been trying to drill into people's heads there are at least 3 different versions to consider here haha but it aint catching on much.
This needs to be quoted more. Let me try and illustrate with crappy pictures.

See the first reveal and is quite different to the other three, the lighting is there plus all the other fancy features. By the time it got to TGS, the door frame was wood, not bricks, and has remained the same into the retail version. The position of the torch is the same in the TGS and PS3 Access videos, but since they added a door in the retail version they have moved it back.

TL;DR - Three versions?

1. Initial reveal (April 2013): Awesome lighting, awesome graphics.
2. TGS/PS3 Access (September 2013): Awesome lighting, downgraded graphics.
3. Retail (March 2014): Downgraded (absent?) lighting, downgraded graphics.
 

solarus

Member
Oct 24, 2009
4,358
0
0
Jim might be different as he literally just did a Jimquisition on this very subject.
It'd be good if you also mention in your tweet that they were showing that build as late as january 2014 just so they dont play the "vertical slices are always shown at reveals" most probably have forgotten that they were showing that build quite recently.
 

Garcia

Member
Oct 5, 2006
7,332
0
1,045
Mexico City
So I've just started the game

Ok, I'm not going to deny it doesn't take a hit but I'm happy to say it looks much better than Dark Souls 1. I took a quick shot with my phone (I know, contard right?) of somewhere near the start and personally I think it looks stunning.
It's been said many times by several people playing the game (myself included): The game is visually inconsistent. Some areas look gorgeous while others look hideous.
 

Grief.exe

Member
Jul 11, 2012
43,857
0
0
Denver
backloggery.com
Just a little advice when you are dealing with people on Twitter, forums, etc. Have some class.

Spewing vile, at a third grade English level will not only get you ignored, but people will not take your point seriously from that point forward.

Honestly, I can see why Journalists, Developers, etc treat us like a joke. Go and browse Steam forums, Twitter, Youtube comments for 5 minutes, the average gamer is far below average levels of intelligence.

I'm not calling anyone on GAF out, just make sure you treat people with respect when directly communicating with them.

EDIT: Just kidding, never go to Steam forums. I couldn't wish that on anyone.

I never said there's no difference, rather that people were acting crazy about it when they hadn't even played the game, which is par for the course on this forum. Since then I've been Twitter bombed and had my integrity and intelligence called into question multiple times. In my mind that just further proves my point.

At 15 hours into DS2, I can only think of one area that doesn't look as good as or better than everything I've seen in the previous games, and on top of that it's an exceptionally good game. If that's not enough for the people who are raging about the preview footage, it's their prerogative not to play it, but they're seriously missing out.
 

A-V-B

Member
Jun 10, 2013
9,757
0
0
Kameo was a showcase of next-gen technology: geometry instancing, HDR dynamic lighting (even has a day-night cycle), parallax mapping, detail mapping, fur shading, interactive water surfaces, tons of particle effects / sprites on screen at once and even a split screen coop mode.

Seriously, in its current form DS2 barely looks like a 360 launch game and it runs poorly:

Except for the dinosaur bones, I might halfway believe it if someone said it was a gamecube game.
 

Vilam

Maxis Redwood
Mar 3, 2009
6,686
0
875
San Francisco
www.gnardone.com
And if more was changed it was for the same reason to get it working on consoles.
Sure, but it makes a pretty big difference in terms of the PC version. While a PC version might potentially keep the better lighting, there's no way in hell they built two different versions of the game with separate geometry and textures that would be released just for PC. The only possible way you might get that is if they're already planning for a Tomb Raider style enhanced port for Gen 4 consoles, and then maybe the PC would retain those elements.

Either way, there's far more than the lighting on the line that has entirely different ramifications.
 

Gattsu25

Banned
Jun 6, 2004
33,448
0
0
USA
blog.gattsu25.com
Just a little advice when you are dealing with people on Twitter, forums, etc. Have some class.

Spewing vile, at a third grade English level will not only get you ignored, but people will not take your point seriously from that point forward.

Honestly, I can see why Journalists, Developers, etc treat us like a joke. Go and browse Steam forums, Twitter, Youtube comments for 5 minutes, the average gamer is far below average levels of intelligence.

I'm not calling anyone on GAF out, just make sure you treat people with respect when directly communicating with them.

EDIT: Just kidding, never go to Steam forums. I couldn't wish that on anyone.
Grief.exe, no need to be that hard on Brad, even if he is being instantly dismissive of his readers without checking the validity of their claims.
 

SneakyStephan

Banned
Jan 23, 2011
18,402
0
0
Very sad that people care more about the graphics than the gameplay. Souls is supposed to be a beacon in the industry for placing gameplay above all. But nope, it's missing a few extra shafts of light, fuck great gameplay!
what are you doing in this thread other than saying stuff like 'child hush' and whining about people talking about graphics in a thread about graphics

In that case the retail version looks better.



I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying very few people will notice or care. In fact quite a few will be happy that the game won't be all tomb of Giants.
no, you're telling people who care in a thread made for people who care that they shouldn't care