Support NeoGAF

[SlimySnake]

Thought this part of their Deathloop technical analysis needed its own thread simply because of how ridiculous it sounds.

This is a technical analysis of a game by a publication that only does technical analysis.

Full Quote:

Curiously, while Deathloop may well be exclusive to PC and PlayStation 5, it's not exactly pushing back technological boundaries, and that's OK. Beyond the stylised, beautifully realised aesthetic, I did enjoy some of the technical flourishes including the highly detailed parallax occlusion maps on ground textures, along with the quality of the first person weapon animations. It's also interesting to note that the reload depth of field effect seen in Criterion's Black (and never seen again!) makes a return for Deathloop. Ultimately though, Deathloop succeeds not because of its technology but rather in terms of its game design, its excellent art and the sense of overall polish.

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.

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.

 

[DenchDeckard]

I mean, I get what you are saying completely but if the game is amazing and runs at a smooth framerate without technical issue it's OK to look mid rate imo. As long as they say its not up to par of a technical marvel.

Gameplay is king in a video game.

 

[BeardGawd]

It's cross gen. Context is key.

 

[Cert.in.Death]

The game is $60 on PS5, plus 10% off if you pre-ordered with Plus.

It's cross gen. Context is key.

?

 

[Zathalus]

Nothing he said is wrong. Not every game needs to push the technical limits. Deathloop looks good because of the great art direction.

Also, DF does way more then simply critique visuals, and even then visuals are more then just the technical boundaries a game may or may not push.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

It looks AAA. That should be enough to be acceptable quality.

Not every game needs to have technical chops of Red Dead Redemption 2, or similar budget

 

[Dick Jones]

Not all games need to be cutting edge

 

[Black_Stride]

Art direction matters more than pushing things technically.
Granted I actually think Deathloop looks better than I thought it would from all the previews...wasnt expecting some of the texture work visible and was sure the characters were gonna be Borderlands levels.
pleasantly surprised.

So yeah they are right.

Throw as many pixels as you want at a problem, but if you lack art direction, cohesion and polish might as well have released the ugliest game alive.

It's cross gen. Context is key.

I take it you have the PS4 version?

 

[SlimySnake]

It's cross gen. Context is key.

It's not cross gen.

 

[Black_Stride]

It's not cross gen.

I know its not but whats this thread for?

The game isnt technically pushing things.....so should DF only analyze games that are pushing things technically, and what constitutes pushing things technically?

 

[SlimySnake]

I know its not but whats this thread for?

The game isnt technically pushing things.....so should DF only analyze games that are pushing things technically, and what constitutes pushing things technically?

No, they should critique the visuals in the games they are analyzing. That's literally their only job.

Imagine if Gamer nexus reviewed a GPU and found it to be sub standard and said hey thats ok. DF is NOT Gamespot, IGN or a traditional game reviewer. When the review thread for the game was made, DF was not in it. DF always gets their own threads because their analysis are from a different angle. They dont cover gameplay and they should not give them game's visuals a pass just because the gameplay is good.

They need to have standards when it comes to reviewing visuals since thats basically all they do. They should know what constitues as pushing things because they have played several next gen only games that look far better than this game which looks worse than some last gen games.

 

[Great Hair]

Well, this game looks literally a decade old and he seems to have NO issues with it.

Spoiler

 

[Interfectum]

It's cross gen. Context is key.

 

[chaseroni]

What a fucking laughable thread, ignored forever m8

 

[Black_Stride]

No, they should critique the visuals in the games they are analyzing. That's literally their only job.

They need to have standards when it comes to reviewing visuals since thats basically all they do. They should know what constitues as pushing things because they have played several next gen only games that look far better than this game which looks worse than some last gen games.

But they did critique the visuals of game.
They literally said its not pushing any technical boundaries.....isnt that what this thread is about?

 

[SlimySnake]

Spoiler

 

[MonarchJT]

Thought this part of their Deathloop technical analysis needed its own thread simply because of how ridiculous it sounds.

This is a technical analysis of a game by a publication that only does technical analysis.

Full Quote:


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.

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.

ad decade what ? you are drunk
go to sleep

 

[ButchCat]

It's cross gen. Context is key.

It's not but I really do have a feeling that development started on the PS4 originally and that they felt limited in regards to the scope of the game and so it moved it to next gen only.

 

[SlimySnake]

But they did critique the visuals of game.
They literally said its not pushing any technical boundaries.....isnt that what this thread is about?

No, they said it IS OK. Did you even read the thread title?

This thread is about the IT IS OK bit. Surely this isnt that complicated.

 

[RoboFu]

So a technical review has to shit on a game of its not using bleeding edge tech?

 

[Black_Stride]

No, they said it IS OK. Did you even read the thread title?

This thread is about the IT IS OK bit. Surely this isnt that complicated.

So is it NOT OK for a game to not be pushing technical boundaries?

Thats what your problem is, every game DF looks at should be pushing technical boundaries?

 

[bender]

Atari 2600 AI

 

[Magnific0giganticus]

Thought this part of their Deathloop technical analysis needed its own thread simply because of how ridiculous it sounds.

This is a technical analysis of a game by a publication that only does technical analysis.

Full Quote:


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.

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.

It's $60...plenty of games don't push visual boundaries, that doesn't mean they are technically flawed. Very different things.

 

[ethomaz]

Seems a lot missed the OP take lol

He is not criticizing the game.
He is saying it sound weird a focused in visual quality team to think it is ok not to push visual quality.

DF is a technical reviewer and not game reviewer.

They should focus in that aspect of the game no matter how good or bad the game is… so they should criticize games that doesn’t push technical boundaries.

 

[SlimySnake]

So is it NOT OK for a game to not be pushing technical boundaries?

Thats what your problem is, every game DF looks at should be pushing technical boundaries?

A next gen game with a $70 price tag should look next gen. Period. Every game needs to ship with a certain standard. This game looks sub standard and should be criticized. DF of all reviewers should compare it to other next gen games with 60 fps modes like Ratchet, Demon Souls and Returnal. Good thing is that there arent that many. So it shouldnt take too long.

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? Because their studio isnt talented enough to make a great game with equally great visuals? When they review Halo in December, should Halo get a pass if it has GOTY caliber gameplay? Of course not. Not from DF.

 

[RoboFu]

Seems a lot missed the OP take lol

He is not criticizing the game.
He is saying it sound weird a focused in visual quality team to think it is ok not to push visual quality.

DF is a technical reviewer and not game reviewer.

They should focus in that aspect of the game no matter how good or bad the game is.

DF are not scoring game tech. They are just telling you if it runs well or not and going over the tech used.
If it’s old or new tech doesn’t matter at all.

 

[Black_Stride]

A next gen game with a $70 price tag should look next gen. Period. Every game needs to ship with a certain standard. This game looks sub standard and should be criticized. DF of all reviewers should compare it to other next gen games with 60 fps modes like Ratchet, Demon Souls and Returnal. Good thing is that there arent that many. So it shouldnt take too long.

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? Because their studio isnt talented enough to make a great game with equally great visuals? When they review Halo in December, should Halo get a pass if it has GOTY caliber gameplay? Of course not. Not from DF.

Who made these rules?

The current highest rated game on PS5 doesnt look nextgen, so should have also not gotten a native PS5 app?

Not every game needs to be bleeding edge else we literally wont get 90% of the games that get made.
Hell by your logic we really only needed to have like 3 PS5 titles over a year in.
Rift Apart and Demons Souls are the only games that "look nextgen".

 

[TheMay30thMan]

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.

It’s clear that this is what you’re really mad about. Nothing in the analysis appears to be out of place. The bits you highlighted can be said about several amazing games and still be relevant to a technical analysis.

 

[SlimySnake]

Who made these rules?

The current highest rated game on PS5 doesnt look nextgen, so should have also not gotten a native PS5 app?

Not every game needs to be bleeding edge else we literally wont get 90% of the games that get made.
Hell by your logic we really only needed to have like 3 PS5 titles over a year in.
Rift Apart and Demons Souls are the only games that "look nextgen".

Who makes rules about what consitutes good game design? Thats the critics job.

This is their job. And they are punting.

And that technical boundaries line is just him giving the game an out. The game needs to look better. Plain and simple. it looks worse than most last gen game and as my screenshots above show, worse than KZ2, a 2009 game running on a 0.250 tflops card.

Not every game needs to be bleeding edge else we literally wont get 90% of the games that get made.
Hell by your logic we really only needed to have like 3 PS5 titles over a year in.

You can make games that look like shit. Most indie games look like they are from the PS2 era. They get reviewed well. Thats NOT the issue here like I have said a million times already in this thread. DF are not game reviewers. They are technical reviewers. Their criteria for reviewing games is different. It's why they get a dedicated thread instead of getting lumped in with other reviewers in the Review Threads.

 

[SlimySnake]

It’s clear that this is what you’re really mad about. Nothing in the analysis appears to be out of place. The bits you highlighted can be said about several amazing games and still be relevant to a technical analysis.

You got me.

 

[Elbow Identity Shallow]

They usually give games that they've enjoyed a brief introduction at the beginning, in particular when it's not an established franchise.

 

[Spukc]

Never settle for less
ffs esp on a brand swanking new console

 

[Darwinning]

Who makes rules about what consitutes good game design? Thats the critics job.

This is their job. And they are punting.

And that technical boundaries line is just him giving the game an out. The game needs to look better. Plain and simple. it looks worse than most last gen game and as my screenshots above show, worse than KZ2, a 2009 game running on a 0.250 tflops card.


You can make games that look like shit. Most indie games look like they are from the PS2 era. They get reviewed well. Thats NOT the issue here like I have said a million times already in this thread. DF are not game reviewers. They are technical reviewers. Their criteria for reviewing games is different. It's why they get a dedicated thread instead of getting lumped in with other reviewers in the Review Threads.

The "game needs to look better" ? Where does this entitled attitude come from exactly?

How about you just appreciate the game as a game? Not every game needs to be a technical showpiece. DF doesn't owe you anything if it's not pushing boundaries.

I'm assuming you're a game developer and you are just speaking from your vast experience developing AAA games?

 

[Hugare]

Seems a lot missed the OP take lol

He is not criticizing the game.
He is saying it sound weird a focused in visual quality team to think it is ok not to push visual quality.

DF is a technical reviewer and not game reviewer.

They should focus in that aspect of the game no matter how good or bad the game is… so they should criticize games that doesn’t push technical boundaries.

I'm not gonna say that this post is dumb, but its really ridiculous

They have reviewed the tech, saying that it wasnt nothing out of the ordinary. Mentioned the neat DOF effect while reloading and etc., but there was only so much thst they could mention.

So instead they focused the rest on art, since the art is striking. And since its part of the presentation, why not?

This is like reviewing Mirrors Edge graphics and saying "meh, baked lighting, some bloom ... unimpressive. Done"

When in reality it looks really fucking good and timeless due to how the tech is used on that art style, so not mentioning it would be criminal.

You guys are reaching so fucking hard

 

[Captain Toad]

It's cross gen. Context is key.

What?

 

[Negotiator101]

I'm guessing OP didn't expect this type of response.

 

[Negotiator101]

I'm not gonna say that this post is dumb, but its really ridiculous

They have reviewed the tech, saying that it wasnt nothing out of the ordinary. Mentioned the neat DOF effect while reloading and etc., but there was only so much thst they could mention.

So instead they focused the rest on art, since the art is striking. And since its part of the presentation, why not?

This is like reviewing Mirrors Edge graphics and saying "meh, baked lighting, some bloom ... unimpressive"

When in reality it looks really fucking good and timeless due to how the tech is used on that art style

You guys are reaching so fucking hard

It's dumb.

 

[Negotiator101]

You got me.

Seemingly everyone got you

 

[Oddvintagechap]

It's not cross gen.

Its on PC.

 

[SlimySnake]

The "game needs to look better" ? Where does this entitled attitude come from exactly?

From having standards. We buy new consoles to get next gen looking games. We are in the 9th generation of consoles. Every generation came with a promise of games looking better. It's how DF made their name when PS3 era game ended up looking disappointing.

It is literally why DF exists.

 

[Jigsaah]

I wasn't expecting next gen graphics for this game. I bought it because I thought it would be a roguelike I could finally get into. I think I would like Returnal as well but I don't have a PS5 yet. Not that this is a consolation prize or anything...I'm interested in both.

Graphically I would say it looks better than Dishonored 2...but then again I played Dishonored 2 on Xbox One X...I'm playing Deathloop on PC. The artstyle is a bit weird though in some choices Arkane has made. Like...why do all the enemies wear these Phantom of the Opera masks? Was this a conscious choice that fits with the narrative of the story? Or was it to save time on creating unique faces for the character models. There were definitely some re-used faces and body types for Dishonored 2 so maybe they just said screw it. I dunno, just speculating right now.

 

[Black_Stride]

You can make games that look like shit. Most indie games look like they are from the PS2 era. They get reviewed well. Thats NOT the issue here like I have said a million times already in this thread. DF are not game reviewers. They are technical reviewers. Their criteria for reviewing games is different. It's why they get a dedicated thread instead of getting lumped in with other reviewers in the Review Threads.

Youre not even trying.

Could you atleast try to make this interesting.

 

[CamHostage]

But they did critique the visuals of game.
They literally said its not pushing any technical boundaries.....isnt that what this thread is about?

It's also a soft-out summary line in a 5,500-word article that accompanies a 17 minute video about the game's performance. I mean, I get it, DF should be focused on tech and not give a pass just because a game is 'fun', but they break down the technicals a whole lot (and give it shit for framepacing issues in RT mode,) and the game is just straight-out technically proficient, not much fancy but efficient and stylishly attractive, which is what it is.

 

[THEAP99]

Technically speaking, not at all impressed by this game. Just smooth, that's it.

Did digital foundry mention any issues like this:

 

[Ozriel]

A next gen game with a $70 price tag should look next gen. Period. Every game needs to ship with a certain standard. This game looks sub standard and should be criticized. DF of all reviewers should compare it to other next gen games with 60 fps modes like Ratchet, Demon Souls and Returnal. Good thing is that there arent that many. So it shouldnt take too long.

Deathloop isn’t $70.

You got me.

yea, he did.

 

[Plantoid]

Game doesn't look bad, but not cutting edge either... The visual bugs are going to get fixed by the time it becomes available to me so I couldn't care less

Not all games have great graphics, I spent more time in ds3 than any other game this year and that looks like ass

 

[M1chl]

Technically speaking, not at all impressed by this game. Just smooth, that's it.

Did digital foundry mention any issues like this:

This is more issue of someone who modeled that part, rather than technical, but yet...there are tools even in Blender to give you warning. And that's free soft.

 

[Closer]

Imagine be like "This is a technical analysis of a game by a publication that only does technical analysis." and than be like "DF's only job is to critique visuals" and than be bitching about "Deathloop succeeds not because of its technology but rather in terms of its game design (visuals), its excellent art (visuals) and the sense of overall polish. (visuals and tech)".

 

[IntentionalPun]

It's a "which game mode should I be playing in" article not a full technical analysis..

 

[Little Chicken]

It isn't the first time they've said this in an analysis.