Do you think Anthem will get a downgrade graphically?

Neither are open world.
But both target a higher framerate and in Battlefront's case it's a locked 60FPS. They also have lots of players in a map, and they are able to achieve that and a high framerate despite that weak CPU.

I really do not see anything in Anthem that looks out of realm of possibility in current gen consoles. It might not "feel" as good as the E3 footage since the entire segment was carefully scripted (birds flying at the exact time, animals doing actions at the exact time player shows up). Plus the opening cutscene looked pre rendered (hence no character model).

But it'll look just as good, on Xbox One and base PS4 we'll see a lower resolution 900P/1080P as usual and maybe a few settings dialed back slightly but it'll look more or less the same. On Pro and X1X I guess the only difference would be resolution and how often it hits CBR 4K.
 
Nothing about this post implies my opinion on this trailer.
You asked me to "Prove them wrong" about an E3 trailer! Imagine if we did that when Watch_Dogs or The Division was shown off, and we told anyone who doubted the trailer they need to prove otherwise? It goes without saying at this point, they need to prove it, not me!

Why would you even engage with someone that you thought was a fanboy if you thought that there was no reasoning with them in the first place?
Huh?! Why would I engage in a fanboy? They often say things that are slanted, so it's common for them to be engaged in conversation. I really don't understand why you're interested in me talking to him or even trying to counter me.
 
You guys don't understand game engines. Frostbite isn't some magical thing that allows every game made in it to look like the best thing ever. DICE's art team does that. DICE games not looking downgraded isn't indicative of what BioWare games look like.

And a large part of what made that gameplay trailer was the gameplay, which looked fake as hell.
 
it's funny how people use the word "downgrade" and phrase it certain ways, as if there is a finished game and then somebody presses a big DOWNGRADE button.

questionable advertising like this can only affect you if you're a dumbass who is completely oblivious, yet people get so worked up over it. they never say the final game will look like this.
 

Crossing Eden

Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
You guys don't understand game engines. Frostbite isn't some magical thing that allows every game made in it to look like the best thing ever. DICE's art team does that. DICE games not looking downgraded isn't indicative of what BioWare games look like.
DA:Inquisition looked gorgeous at the time.

And a large part of what made that gameplay trailer was the gameplay, which looked fake as hell.
Can you be specific as to what part looked faked? Nothing about what I saw from that trailer looked like scripted animation playback in place of gameplay.
 
Definitely.

Bioware have yet to prove they can handle Frostbite as well as DICE, and they've a proven record with releasing preview material looking better than what the final game turned out like.
 
It looked like one of those "the next gen consoles are coming but we can't say shit, but we're gonna show this anyway" trailers.

Except it's too god damn early even for that.
 
Did they specifically mention if it was retail? That devkit has double the memory which wouldn't hurt with those high quality assets and effects. I think it has extra cus too? Also yeah because vertical slice.
This is all that has been said afaik,
.

You asked me to "Prove them wrong" about an E3 trailer! Imagine if we did that when Watch_Dogs or The Division was shown off, and we told anyone who doubted the trailer they need to prove otherwise? It goes without saying at this point, they need to prove it, not me!


Huh?! Why would I engage in a fanboy? They often say things that are slanted, so it's common for them to be engaged in conversation. I really don't understand why you're interested in me talking to him or even trying to counter me.
I never asked you to "prove them wrong about an E3 trailer." I was addressing the way you where addressing a fellow Gaf member. Anyway, the trailer getting or not getting downgraded was not what Leeh's comment was about. It was about people still thinking that it was played on a high powered PC when we have proof it was played on a 1X. See above.

As to your second question. I asked that because you keep calling the poster a fanboy as a way to prove your point as if that fact automatically makes them wrong and you right instead of reasoning with them open mindedly as if either of you could be wrong. If you believe fanboys can be reasoned with then why not do it in a civil manner?

Or do you really think that fanboys are always wrong no matter what and that makes you right just because?

If they are going about saying truly stupid things and being rude then I could understand not trying to reason.

But Leeh was being very reasonable in their initial post. Nothing about their post made it seem like they weren't taking this situation logically. In fact, they where using the actual evidence that we have to validate their belief.
 
You asked me to "Prove them wrong" about an E3 trailer! Imagine if we did that when Watch_Dogs or The Division was shown off, and we told anyone who doubted the trailer they need to prove otherwise? It goes without saying at this point, they need to prove it, not me!


Huh?! Why would I engage in a fanboy? They often say things that are slanted, so it's common for them to be engaged in conversation. I really don't understand why you're interested in me talking to him or even trying to counter me.
So, what do you think then, it wasn't running real-time? It was running on a PC? Think about what I said, and then refer to the following clarification:
UPDATE: In a previous version of this article, we stated that it wasn't clear what hardware this demo was running on - in fact, EA's Patrick Soderlund does confirm that it is a real-time Xbox One X demonstration. Many apologies for the error, we will have a deeper look at the demo very soon, but we can confirm 2160p checkerboarding from our tests - something that would be unlikely on PC and very much in line with Frostbite's console technologies.
Also, with showings like this, I fully believe they just go to the nth degree to show it in the best light possible. I agree with the thoughts of this humble poster:
Didn't look that hard to hit except the start which will be way worse unless it's a scripted part.The foliage density makes it look fantastic but the quality isn't anything amazing there. I think once a player stops and walks around off the rollercoaster path, you will see a pretty nice game but with all the usual aspects when you actually focus on stuff, it's all there in that demo but the rise gets you.
 
Downgrade incoming on almost everything except PC and probably XBoneX. Not because PS4Pro can't do it but because it'd be pretty dumb (although not impossible) for Anthem devs not to make XboneX a priority in dev given they're marketing partners.
 
I never asked you to "prove them wrong about an E3 trailer." I was addressing the way you where addressing a fellow Gaf member. Anyway, the trailer getting or not getting downgraded was not what Leeh's comment was about. It was about people still thinking that it was played on a high powered PC when we have proof it was played on a 1X. See above.
Again, Vlaud, you responded to my comment about bias, where the last thing I said was:
You should still question it, even if you love the brand.
Your response was a dismisal to questioning this E3 trailer and that:
Prove them wrong about their belief by using facts or sound arguments or stop.
How am I supposed to prove an E3 trailer wrong? Obviously I can't, and if you don't know Leeh and his posting history, or think Leeh is fair between Playstaion and Xbox, I don't know what to say.

As to your second question. I asked that because you keep calling the poster a fanboy as a way to prove your point as if that fact automatically makes them wrong and you right instead of reasoning with them open mindedly as if either of you could be wrong. If you believe fanboys can be reasoned with then why not do it in a civil manner?
Of course I could be wrong! What is your problem?! I'm the one here saying to keep an open mind and don't believe game publishers who have fooled us so many times. Yet you want to defend the one who says:

NeoGAF, the depression of gaming.

Seriously, what's up with everyone? The game was clarified to be running on a 1X with CBR; pop-in is seen in the trailer and you all still claim it's rendered on a stupid PC.
Some might be eager to belive, but we need to question E3 trailers. That's all I'm saying. A
 
How am I supposed to prove an E3 trailer wrong? Obviously I can't, and if you don't know Leeh and his posting history, or think Leeh is fair between Playstaion and Xbox, I don't know what to say.
You're starting to piss me off now. What the hell is wrong with my post history, is it because I think Sony is being a dick about cross-play? Is that what's bothering you?

Cause that's pretty much the only shitty thing I've said about them recently. I usually stay out of PS threads...

Oh, and reply to the above, dont ignore what I asked regarding the actual topic of the OP.
 
I suspect yes, and I also suspect that, if they go in a Destiny direction with it, they are going to find themselves lost at sea with the core design of the game. The reason Destiny competition is so sparse is that the model used in Destiny is sort of incomplete; so in the demo they showed, they talked a lot about how cool it'd be to fight this boss (lets leave it for another day), or explore this area (oh yeah, good leveling spot for person who isn't with us!) -- when you actually get there, and do these things, are they even fun? Do they have staying power? Because that's where the Destiny model feels a bit incomplete, is when you go down those paths, or fight that cool looking thing, and Destiny has one of the best fps combat systems in the biz -- does Bioware have even something close to the tightness and design of those gunplay systems? Sounds like I'm being pessimistic, but it's really just about being realistic; if the people who got there first don't have those things completely sorted out, what hope does Bioware have? They can put their best team on this, and it's still going to be very, very hard to complete the unfinished part of the picture with these kind of games.
 
You're starting to piss me off now. What the hell is wrong with my post history, is it because I think Sony is being a dick about cross-play? Is that what's bothering you?
You know you have a history of pushing Xbox above the average. From the 9 out of 10 friends, to why you have the avatar. I don't mean anything by it, but your posts are pro Xbox, wouldn't you agree? That's why when you're attacking skeptics on an E3 trailer, I'm saying there's reason to be skeptical.
 
Yeah, alright then :) Its just that target render tend to mean something else in a game production, is all. But yes, E3 demos are prematurely polished. If done well its a benefit to the game, if done in a bad way its a timesink. Hehe, yeah I managed to put my fingers into a lot of games over the years.
I see! Thanks for the explanation!


Do you think it is ethical to do it this way? (from your experience) or would you prefer that we saw games in a more roughed state at tradeshows like e3?
I wonder where we draw the line between "showing the vision" and possible "overpromising"!?
 

Crossing Eden

Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
I found it to be quite inconsistent, some aspects were excellent while others, particularly on the animation front, looked underwhelming. Battlefront was really tight by comparison but basically multiplayer only without most of the scope of inquisition.
Pretty sure animation is where they struggled the most since they had the conversation system from scratch again. Anthem looks like Bioware focused on things that FB does really well off the bat, that being large amounts of detailed terrain and foliage, dynamic weather, TPS gameplay, the flight system, etc.
 
I see! Thanks for the explanation!


Do you think it is ethical to do it this way? (from your experience) or would you prefer that we saw games in a more roughed state at tradeshows like e3?
I wonder where we draw the line between "showing the vision" and possible "overpromising"!?
Well, its a tricky one. I assure you developers dont set out to lie, but its also extremely hard to predict exactly where the performance and production of the game will end up, so its always a best guess. The closer to release the marketing cycle kicks in, the more realistic it tends to be. It depends on so many factors, how mature your engine already is, if its a new platform or not, etc.
 
You know you have a history of pushing Xbox above the average. From the 9 out of 10 friends, to why you have the avatar. I don't mean anything by it, but your posts are pro Xbox, wouldn't you agree? That's why when you're attacking skeptics on an E3 trailer, I'm saying there's reason to be skeptical.
9 out my 10 friends did buy Halo digitally but I was rather stupid and OTT in how I put my message across. I always thought that digital was on a large increase, and its not like I was wrong. My avatar was a bet for the 1X having Zen, which I lost. Can't blame a guy for hoping his next console wouldn't have a POS Jaguar now can you? Dont see how any of that points me towards being a "fanboy".

I'd own every console and put wayyy more time into gaming if I could. For the past 2 months I've been lucky to put 2 hours a week in. I play on Xbox cause of my mates and mostly Forza.

My comment wasn't even related to downgrades, it was about people doubting this was running on a 1X, which had officially been confirmed by EA themselves and stated by DF post analysis.

Considering youre post history where you say things like "I'll wait for the Leeh report" in sales threads, its almost as if you have internet beef with me for some strange reason.
 
Again, Vlaud, you responded to my comment about bias, where the last thing I said was:

Your response was a dismisal to questioning this E3 trailer and that:
This was my response.

Prove them wrong about their belief by using facts or sound arguments or stop.

Saying well you are biased towards x is a cheap and petty way of trying to shut down a conversation.

We all have our preferences. You are right that we should question everything that favors or disfavors them. But you are just assuming that the poster in question hasn't already done that by saying that they are a fanboy.
Read the underlined. I never dismissed you saying that anyone should be skeptical.

How am I supposed to prove an E3 trailer wrong? Obviously I can't, and if you don't know Leeh and his posting history, or think Leeh is fair between Playstaion and Xbox, I don't know what to say.
Again for the umpteenth time. Leeh was talking about people thinking it was played on a high end PC when we have proof it was played on a 1X.

This was Leehs post,
NeoGAF, the depression of gaming.

Seriously, what's up with everyone? The game was clarified to be running on a 1X with CBR; pop-in is seen in the trailer and you all still claim it's rendered on a stupid PC.
This was your first response to that exact post.
You have a clear bias to want to believe in this E3 trailer, but we've seen too many reasons not to by now.
You imply bias when nothing Leeh said made it seem that way. In fact, they where using facts. I think you misunderstood what Leeh was talking about. Either way, calling someone a bias fanboy is not a good look when they where being reasonable.

Of course I could be wrong! What is your problem?! I'm the one here saying to keep an open mind and don't believe game publishers who have fooled us so many times. Yet you want to defend the one who says:



Some might be eager to belive, but we need to question E3 trailers. That's all I'm saying. A
You jumped on another poster immediately calling them a bias fanboy in order to prove you right as if they are immediately wrong for being a fan. This behavior, going so far to call someone a derogatory term in order to prove your validity, makes it seem that you want to bully them into your line of thinking.

Dude, I'm just trying to help really. We are all, hopefully, constantly growing and learning how to become better people through life experiences. I know I've come a long way. I used to be a fanboy and I promise you that this kind of behavior did nothing to change my mind rather it put my back against the wall and made me dig my heels in even further whenever it happened. When doing that it's infinitely harder to try to be objective. Making it even harder to change some ones mind about anything. Now my green is still admittedly washing out so I'm not perfect. But knowing that I'm not perfect is what helps me to try to strive to have empathy toward others of different belief as often as I can. Though it is definitely hard at times and I inevitably end up failing.

Engaging someone with Rational, empathetic, passionate and friendly conversation has a way of organically pushing bias to the side so that productive and beneficial conversation can occur.

That's all I was trying to say in a short hand form but maybe I should have explained it better to begin with.
 
Yes, I'm 100% sure of it.

Downgrades are a common part of E3 especially when it comes to AAA games like this. Also, the fact that it's a Bioware game and the entire gameplay looked scripted to hell pretty much guarantees a downgrade.
 
Absolutely. Bioware have *never* been good at graphics or engine optimisation. Ever. It's just not something their studio is good at.
Incorrect.
They're not particularly good at animation but their environments have always looked good,even great compared to competition in the timeframe of release.