Support NeoGAF

[Braag]

Not sure if this has already been brought up.



Erik Kain's post on Forbes

So it sounds like they made the game look stunning on the PC and had the game pretty much ready with those fancy graphics but couldn't make it run properly on the consoles so they downgraded it. Completely understandable.
But since they originally visioned the game to look like the previous build on the PC and had it pretty much ready looking like that, if they go back now and downgrade the PC version as well then From really dun goofed.

 

[Eusis]

Keep rewarding these companies for shitty behavior. Thank you.

If you're going to be that uptight about everything done wrong by a company then get ready to move out into the wilderness and cut ties off to modern civilization because there's all sorts of bullshit out there and you can't avoid all of it otherwise. You need to know when to pick your battles and frankly it's shitty behavior to demonize people for not thinking this is a big deal, even I wouldn't be saying that bullshit to people who wanted the Xbox One with the terrible DRM on it.

 

[DUFFMCWALIN]

No, fuck From and I hope everyone who worked on the game loses their job. They disgust me. I'm actually vomiting right now.

Holy shit. This board (unless your being sarcastic).

 

[CountAntonius]

Holy shit. This board (unless your being sarcastic).

He is.

 

[DUFFMCWALIN]

He is.

I was going to say. That is still some great hyperbole!

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Saying "torches are useless" is clearly a legit statement to make, you're just nitpicking.

Except it's not remotely legit at all. Torches are far from useless. No, not every single area is dark like Tomb of the Giants. But that's clearly by design. You think the downgrade has anything to do with torches? Don't be absurd. They are clearly capable of having pitch black areas (and they do have some such areas, even in DkS1). No doubt people complained about having to rely on the torch too much and that's why some areas aren't as dark as they were initially. The downgrade affects inherent lighting in other areas, and textures and geometry, not the torch mechanic.

One enemy type in one area that recoils at the sight of the torch isn't really the same as what the developers were talking up during the reveal and subsequent interviews and I think you know that.

We have 1. The Gutter, which sort of needs a torch, and 2. seven or eight enemies that don't like fire in one area of the game. The torch and sconce mechanic is not as vital as it was originally meant to be. Whether or not you think that change is for the better is irrelevant; the change was made and it's pretty apparent.

The torch is immensely useful for finding secrets in

Spoiler

Black Gulch

and detecting falls in

Spoiler

the Shrine of Amana

as well. But sure, there was a change from the network test (it's not as important in, say, Huntsman Copse as during the beta), but do you really think they made the area brighter to preserve the framerate? Do you really think they struggle technically at making an area dark? Come on. It's a design decision, not a technical issue (unlike, say, the lightning/texture downgrades in

Spoiler

Aldia's Keep

).

No, fuck From and I hope everyone who worked on the game loses their job. They disgust me. I'm actually vomiting right now.

Hahahaha

 

[Servbot24]

Holy shit. This board (unless your being sarcastic).

Sarcasm. Though the fact that it could be mistaken for sincere in this thread does say a lot.

 

[Eusis]

Except it's not remotely legit at all. Torches are far from useless. No, not every single area is dark like Tomb of the Giants. But that's clearly by design. You think the downgrade has anything to do with torches? Don't be absurd. They are clearly capable of having pitch black areas (and they do have some such areas, even in DkS1). No doubt people complained about having to rely on the torch too much and that's why some areas aren't as dark as they were initially. The downgrade affects inherent lighting in other areas, and textures and geometry, not the torch mechanic.

The lack of decent means to replenish the torch ruined it anyway I thought and undermined overall game use for it. I burned through it all in the tutorial thinking at first it wouldn't go out until I put it out, then thinking that I was set on a limited time from lighting it to when it'd go out, but nope it really is a finite exhaustible that can only be replenished by picking up more torches with no where to buy more fuel or otherwise extend it. It was not something you could keep using in the game without being at risk of running out and being unable to use it at a time you needed it until you combed the game world or ground on the right mobs. Not unless I'm missing something, but when you've gone over most of the game and couldn't find an easy way to replenish that's kind of damning in its own right.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

The lack of decent means to replenish the torch ruined it anyway I thought and undermined overall game use for it. I burned through it all in the tutorial thinking at first it wouldn't go out until I put it out, then thinking that I was set on a limited time from lighting it to when it'd go out, but nope it really is a finite exhaustible that can only be replenished by picking up more torches with no where to buy more fuel or otherwise extend it. It was not something you could keep using in the game without being at risk of running out and being unable to use it at a time you needed it until you combed the game world or ground on the right mobs. Not unless I'm missing something, but when you've gone over most of the game and couldn't find an easy way to replenish that's kind of damning in its own right.

Eh...? I used the torch pretty damn liberally throughout the whole game, and I still have 45+ minutes worth of time... you're doing it wrong?

 

[quantumnerd]

I'm relieved that the statement from From in the Forbes Article basically says the PC version was the target and its graphics are fine.

The "false advertising" isn't that bad, anyways, since it was prerelease stuff. Unless they released some conventional advertising like posters/TV spots that I don't remember seeing.

 

[Metalingus5150]

I'm relieved that the statement from From in the Forbes Article basically says the PC version was the target and its graphics are fine.

The "false advertising" isn't that bad, anyways, since it was prerelease stuff. Unless they released some conventional advertising like posters/TV spots that I don't remember seeing.

The pictures of the game before the downgrade are on the back of the box of the ps3/360 versions.

 

[Servbot24]

I'm relieved that the statement from From in the Forbes Article basically says the PC version was the target and its graphics are fine.

The "false advertising" isn't that bad, anyways, since it was prerelease stuff. Unless they released some conventional advertising like posters/TV spots that I don't remember seeing.

I believe the screenshots on the back of the box are the better versions. Not that anyone is going to base their purchase on thumbnails behind a box.

 

[Eusis]

Eh...? I used the torch pretty damn liberally throughout the whole game, and I still have 45+ minutes worth of time... you're doing it wrong?

I have over an hour and I used it when I needed to. I just hate that something that should plausibly be easily replenished and isn't an outright game breaker to do so is constrained as tightly as it is. If the game was seriously dependent on that for every dark corridor I think it'd get unreasonable really.

The pictures of the game before the downgrade are on the back of the box of the ps3/360 versions.

There's only two on the back and they look like they came from the game or close enough that it won't matter to most people, it's not like it's showing content that simply isn't there. SMB3 was actually sort of guilty of THAT one, some of the boxes had a completely different map for World 1 which made it seem as if some copies may've had different stages or something crazy.

EDIT: Actually crazily enough it looks like they DID release two different versions of SMB3, but it sounds like they just cleaned the translation up.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

The pictures of the game before the downgrade are on the back of the box of the ps3/360 versions.

Those pictures are thumbnail-sized (literally thumbnails!) of the following:

http://i2.cdnds.net/13/49/618x347/gaming-dark-souls-2-screenshot-1.jpg
http://images.lazygamer.net/2013/12/Dark-Souls-2-7.jpg

But let's all be outraged at this BLATANT FALSE ADVERTISING right? Hell I'm not even sure if this is actually even pre-downgrade, to be honest. This is faux outrage at its best.

 

[RK9039]

At least we'll get some news on the PC version in April (according to that Forbes article).

For making me wait this long the graphics better be so shiny that I can see my own face in the reflection.

 

[Servbot24]

It really would have ruined the game if everything were TotG. That area was not "atmospheric", it was stumbling through the dark inch by inch. Glad the mechanic doesn't matter as much now. A torch here and there could be cool though.

Those pictures are thumbnail-sized (literally thumbnails!) of the following:

http://i2.cdnds.net/13/49/618x347/gaming-dark-souls-2-screenshot-1.jpg
http://images.lazygamer.net/2013/12/Dark-Souls-2-7.jpg

But let's all be outraged at this BLATANT FALSE ADVERTISING right? Hell I'm not even sure if this is actually even pre-downgrade, to be honest. This is faux outrage at its best.

Yeah, I can't really tell. Looks pretty close.

 

[Eusis]

But let's all be outraged at this BLATANT FALSE ADVERTISING right? Hell I'm not even sure if this is actually even pre-downgrade, to be honest. This is faux outrage at its best.

. . . I don't remember that from

Spoiler

the Belfry roof.

Guess it does share that "false advertising" angle SMB3 had afterall.

 

[CountAntonius]

At least we'll get some news on the PC version in April (according to that Forbes article).

For making me wait this long the graphics better be so shiny that I can see my own face in the reflection.

They've said all along they will have more news about the PC version closer to it's release. We are just kinda ya know very impatient. I know I sure as hell am.

 

[elohel]

I don't think so. I like the Giant Bomb crew, but most of the stuff they say is noise. Patrick is the only one that tries to approach things with a journalistic angle, but sometimes he also gets caught up in the hype cycle.

what does journalistic mean?

 

[SlasherJPC]

Is it just me or does some of the walls in the wharf area have that shiny, slimy look to them like that one stairwell reveal footage had?

 

[Eusis]

Is it just me or does some of the walls in the wharf area have that shiny, slimy look to them like that one stairwell reveal footage had?

There was undoubtedly also an artistic angle to keep in mind as they changed what had which effects. It's not implausible that they could've had all the resources in the world and the dragon manor would've still had the light beams axed in favor of uniform lighting.

 

[Servbot24]

EDIT: Actually crazily enough it looks like they DID release two different versions of SMB3, but it sounds like they just cleaned the translation up.

This reminds me of the screenshots on Mega Man Legends 2's box. It showed a screen of an area that didn't make the game at all. Always really made me wonder if there was some super-secret area I hadn't discovered yet.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

Except it's not remotely legit at all. Torches are far from useless. No, not every single area is dark like Tomb of the Giants. But that's clearly by design. You think the downgrade has anything to do with torches? Don't be absurd. They are clearly capable of having pitch black areas (and they do have some such areas, even in DkS1). No doubt people complained about having to rely on the torch too much and that's why some areas aren't as dark as they were initially. The downgrade affects inherent lighting in other areas, and textures and geometry, not the torch mechanic.


The torch is immensely useful for finding secrets in

Spoiler

Black Gulch

and detecting falls in

Spoiler

the Shrine of Amana

as well. But sure, there was a change from the network test (it's not as important in, say, Huntsman Copse as during the beta), but do you really think they made the area brighter to preserve the framerate? Do you really think they struggle technically at making an area dark? Come on. It's a design decision, not a technical issue (unlike, say, the lightning/texture downgrades in

Spoiler

Aldia's Keep

).


Hahahaha

If it was a design decision, it was very last minute, as evidenced by the remaining tutorial and numerous sconces, as well as things that were clearly never meant to be visible being clear as day, like the back wall of the Wharf or the suspiciously empty fully lit blown-out box rooms the primal fires are in.

 

[RedSwirl]

If the TGS demo was indeed PS3, all we know is that it ran at a playable framerate in one area. We really don't know what the game could have looked or ran like on PS3 in other areas with the old lighting model. For all we know the area in the TGS demo is the only one that didn't run like shit on PS3.

 

[akira28]

Wait, the PC version is ok?! Yes. No Steam sale necessary.

 

[Comfort Jones]

The pictures of the game before the downgrade are on the back of the box of the ps3/360 versions.

Those pictures are thumbnail-sized (literally thumbnails!) of the following:

http://i2.cdnds.net/13/49/618x347/gaming-dark-souls-2-screenshot-1.jpg
http://images.lazygamer.net/2013/12/Dark-Souls-2-7.jpg

You can tell that's from before the downgrade, Metallingus?

 

[Forsaken82]

If the PC version doesn't have those extra effects then this goes from insta-buy to sub-10 bucks sale for me.

Disgraceful business practise.

Perhaps you woul dhave preferred they showed nothing of the game till a week before release?

 

[Metalingus5150]

You can tell that's from before the downgrade, Metallingus?

My mistake. I could have sworn there was an unboxing and it showed the mirror knight among other screenshots on the back of a collectors edition.

 

[Lalalandia]

Wait, the PC version is ok?! Yes. No Steam sale necessary.

??? They've declined to say anything on the PC version we're no closer to knowing what features are or are not in.

 

[Raptomex]

Do the pics on the game box show off the downgraded pics or the pre-launch pics?

 

[HDgaming42]

I'm all for the false advertising outrage in this thread but thinking they intentionally gimped the game when they didn't need to for some evil reason seems silly to me.

 

[Haines]

As an outsider looking in I'm astonished how many threads and how many pages this has been going on for.

As a gaming fan I haven't read a single word on if the game is actually good In the few instances I've tried to skim even the other. Lots of talk of play through a tho so must be alright.

My stance? I'll wait and buy the ps4 version.

 

[CountAntonius]

There have been a lot of people who said they gutted the console version in order to sell an "inevitable" next gen version with all the pretty left in.

 

[akira28]

??? They've declined to say anything on the PC version we're no closer to knowing what features are or are not in.

Yeah I finally read the Forbes article, and my sense of relief is gone. Back to fear and uncertainty.

 

[HDgaming42]

There have been a lot of people who said they gutted the console version in order to sell an "inevitable" next gen version with all the pretty left in.

Seriously? And they weren't being sarcastic? I must have glanced over those posts because I certainly don't think that's the dialogue that's been going on here...

What I read is a whole lot of talk about how ancient the consoles are and anyone who believed FROM when they claimed to have been demoing on an actual PS3 were either ignorant or self-deluded.

 

[Oracle Dragon]

Well, if they really had it all working but had to sacrifice it all for framerate, maybe it will encourage them to release Xbone/PS4 version with those features restored...?

I don't really hold anything against From. The game is from all accounts great, even taken the graphics into account. Its hard to feel "lied to" given the wealth of information out there on the product. Most companies advertising pre-release footage do provide disclaimers saying it is may not represent the final product, and that it can change with little or no notice. I'd be surprised if From didn't do the same thing (maybe they did, maybe they did not, I don't recall).

Within record time of the game being released there were reviews and Lets Plays all over the internet. If the change in graphic fidelity was such a huge deal to some that they would not only be vitriolic towards From, but actively looking for refunds or the like, it really doesn't seem like too much to ask to wait a day and see the videos of the finished product. Nobody forced you to rush to the store, buy it at midnight, rip open the package and play it sight unseen on day one. SHOULD you be able to do that? Yeah, of course. Heck, I sure wanted to. But its hard to call it "deceptive" or "bait and switch", etc. Check the back of the box and look at the screenshots. If they are not the same as what is on your TV or at the least have "PC version shown" in the fine print, then yeah, now that's not cool... they should get burned for that. But if they do, I find it harder to fault them, IMO anyway.

 

[CountAntonius]

Seriously? And they weren't being sarcastic? I must have glanced over those posts because I certainly don't think that's the dialogue that's been going on here...

Nope. No sarcasm. Some people didn't think it was so obvious why these graphical featured were cut.

 

[HDgaming42]

Nope. No sarcasm. Some people didn't think it was so obvious why these graphical featured were cut.

Well, if they claimed (and I'm guessing now this is coming under fire) that their demo (with lighting and particle effects intact) was actually running on a PS3, can you blame people for being confused when those very features were cut back or out entirely on the very platform they claimed to be demoing on?

Not everyone understands (myself included) why if that level could look that good in a demo, why in the very least--that very same level--could not look that good at retail...

I think the only explanation at this point is that they faked the PS3 demo (the one that looked good).

 

[phantomspiker]

Yeah I finally read the Forbes article, and my sense of relief is gone. Back to fear and uncertainty.

Well, they promised better textures and a higher framerate according the this article from Gamespot.

Kinda vague, but it's something.

 

[Misterinenja]

Can I return my copy to gamestop for a full refund since the product I bought wasn't what I was shown and sold on?

Why not just trade it in bro? Imagine how many used copies of Kameo you could get for it.

I heard that games graphics are sick.

 

[luckygodzilla]

Now I don't know if this has been posted yet, but apparently Forbes got into touch with "someone" close to From, and was able to shine some light on the issue.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...broken-on-consoles-before-graphics-downgrade/

Some choice quotes from the article:

“This is what it comes down to: a playable framerate. The early builds that the screenshots came from were playable but only just so. The game was not in a state where it could be sold at that point. I strongly suspect that they were focusing heavily on delivering a top-notch experience on PC and underestimated the challenges the new systems would pose on PS3 / Xbox360. That’s my analysis, anyway. But, factually, the early builds played like Blighttown the entire game.

“I sincerely don’t think they intended to deceive, but in the end they sacrificed a huge amount of graphical fidelity at the very end of development because they couldn’t resolve the framerate in any other way. They had to promote the game with screens and trailers, but at that time even they had no idea they were going to have to drop the settings so much, I suspect.

“I want people to know the truth. I know a lot of people just feel lied to, but I think the reality is a bit different. It doesn’t mean they handled it properly, but I think they made the only decision they COULD make in the end. The game would have been much worse without the change (as in, many would call it unplayable and broken.)”

Sounds like From bit off way more than they could chew (god knows the praise for their games is not for the technical aspect). But still, the way this guy put it, it sounds like they had it running on a PC on one point, which means that something must really be up if we don't get the improved lighting with the port.

 

[UnrealEck]

The early builds that the screenshots came from were playable but only just so.

However that same pre-downgraded graphical quality was seen in videos like the two on the PlayStation Access channel running apparently on PS3 and featuring PlayStation button prompts in the UI at completely solid frame rates.

Which makes me question:

I sincerely don’t think they intended to deceive...

 

[CountAntonius]

Well, if they claimed (and I'm guessing now this is coming under fire) that their demo (with lighting and particle effects intact) was actually running on a PS3, can you blame people for being confused when those very features were cut back or out entirely on the very platform they claimed to be demoing on?

Not everyone understands (myself included) why if that level could look that good in a demo, why in the very least--that very same level--could not look that good at retail...

I think the only explanation at this point is that they faked the PS3 demo (the one that looked good).

My first exposure was Giantbomb saying the demo didn't run very good compared to the retail version they were reviewing. . Common sense also led me to believe if the game as is was struggling to hit 30 on consoles it would probably be much worse with more complex lighting and that From Software would not alienate a huge install base to try to grab a tiny next gen market who would probably buy the game anyway for 60fps and 1080p resolution by purposely ruining the look of their current gen version which would be the one to bring them the most sales anyway.

 

[luckygodzilla]

However that same pre-downgraded graphical quality was seen in videos like the two on the PlayStation Access channel running apparently on PS3 and featuring PlayStation button prompts in the UI at completely solid frame rates.

Which makes me question:

The only confirmed areas we got to see were the Mirror/Looking Glass Knight and the keep at the Forrest of Fallen Giants. Both are entirely enclosed vertical slices with bugger all for draw distance. Still, the framerate seemed better in these ps3 demos than in the actual release.

 

[zkylon]

Now I don't know if this has been posted yet, but apparently Forbes got into touch with "someone" close to From, and was able to shine some light on the issue.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...broken-on-consoles-before-graphics-downgrade/

Some choice quotes from the article:

“This is what it comes down to: a playable framerate. The early builds that the screenshots came from were playable but only just so. The game was not in a state where it could be sold at that point. I strongly suspect that they were focusing heavily on delivering a top-notch experience on PC and underestimated the challenges the new systems would pose on PS3 / Xbox360. That’s my analysis, anyway. But, factually, the early builds played like Blighttown the entire game.

“I sincerely don’t think they intended to deceive, but in the end they sacrificed a huge amount of graphical fidelity at the very end of development because they couldn’t resolve the framerate in any other way. They had to promote the game with screens and trailers, but at that time even they had no idea they were going to have to drop the settings so much, I suspect.

“I want people to know the truth. I know a lot of people just feel lied to, but I think the reality is a bit different. It doesn’t mean they handled it properly, but I think they made the only decision they COULD make in the end. The game would have been much worse without the change (as in, many would call it unplayable and broken.)”

Sounds like From bit off way more than they could chew (god knows the praise for their games is not for the technical aspect). But still, the way this guy put it, it sounds like they had it running on a PC on one point, which means that something must really be up if we don't get the improved lighting with the port.

interesting if legit but basically confirmation of what we all already suspected

but hey, hope for pc version maybe

 

[HDgaming42]

My first exposure was Giantbomb saying the demo didn't run very good compared to the retail version they were reviewing. . Common sense also led me to believe if the game as is was struggling to hit 30 on consoles it would probably be much worse with more complex lighting and that From Software would not alienate a huge install base to try to grab a tiny next gen market who would probably buy the game anyway for 60fps and 1080p resolution by purposely ruining the look of their current gen version.

And that's reasonable. But that's not everyone's experience. I was trying to stay fairly spoiler free, and was popping in and out of coverage. I caught the Playstation Access demo, and then later read about how a GAF member had verified it was running on an actual PS3--that it crashed--they rebooted and navigated via the XMB to the disc.

So in my experience, I saw what I was told (and supposedly verified) was a demo running on PS3 at a certain level of fidelity. Fast-forward to retail. Whoah. Whooooah.

Where my torch at? What's with this elevated gamma bullshit? Where'd the impressive lighting go? Why are there textures far worse than the very textures from the "PS3" demo I watched?

If that was your path to DSII as it was mine, you might be scratching your head too. I wait to buy the "superior" version of games--don't care about the platform, don't have a horse in that race.

I'm waiting for PC, but damn I sure hope some of the stuff they talked about returns...

I suspect brightening up entire levels was a technical consideration to account for the reduced dynamic lights, and not a play-test or artistic decision.

I hope it wasn't a play-test decision. Reading about what happened to the first Assassin's Creed was really enlightening. Game was going to be really ground-breaking, but people needed their radar...

 

[CountAntonius]

And that's reasonable. But that's not everyone's experience. I was trying to stay fairly spoiler free, and was popping in and out of coverage. I caught the Playstation Access demo, and then later read about how a GAF member had verified it was running on an actual PS3--that it crashed--they rebooted and navigated via the XMB to the disc.

So in my experience, I saw what I was told (and supposedly verified) was a demo running on PS3 at a certain level of fidelity. Fast-forward to retail. Whoah. Whooooah.

Where my torch at? What's with this elevated gamma bullshit? Where'd the impressive lighting go? Why are there textures far worse than the very textures from the "PS3" demo I watched?

If that was your path to DSII as it was mine, you might be scratching your head too. I wait to buy the "superior" version of games--don't care about the platform, don't have a horse in that race.

I'm waiting for PC, but damn I sure hope some of the stuff they talked about returns...

I suspect brightening up entire levels was a technical consideration to account for the reduced dynamic lights, and not a play-test or artistic decision.

I hope it was a play-test decision. Reading about what happened to the first Assassin's Creed was really enlightening. Game was going to be really ground-breaking, but people needed their radar...

Oh I totally agree that it was wrong that people had no idea what they were getting at retail. But since retail it was pretty obvious why the cuts were made and I just don't believe it was anything more sinister than performance issues. Only point I was addressing.

 

[Grief.exe]

“I sincerely don’t think they intended to deceive, but in the end they sacrificed a huge amount of graphical fidelity at the very end of development because they couldn’t resolve the framerate in any other way."

That is essentially what we have been theorizing since day one. If they truly were making desperate cuts at the last minute, then the graphical effects are probably finalized for the PC version.

To be completely honest, any engine resources/compatibility for the last-gen consoles are a sunk investment at this point anyways. From is looking forward to PC/next-gen which will be their future as a company.

 

[HDgaming42]

Oh I totally agree that it was wrong that people had no idea what they were getting at retail. But since retail it was pretty obvious why the cuts were made and I just don't believe it was anything more sinister than performance issues. Only point I was addressing.

Thank-you for a civil and well-reasoned discourse. I mistook your initial post as a form of straw-man argument. I apologize--Jim Carey .gif was overkill. =)

 

[CountAntonius]

Thank-you for a civil and well-reasoned discourse. I mistook your initial post as a form of straw-man argument. I apologize--Jim Carey .gif was overkill. =)