-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
In hindsight, the Anthem reveal trailer is Watch Dogs / Killzone 2 levels of bullshit
- Thread starter TheSubsequentStrajack
- Start date
potentially depriving yourself of different types of entertainment out of spite like this is hilarious
Then you still don't understand what vertical slices and most reveal trailers are all about. First off all they provide some sort of guideline / proof of concept in terms of visuals and gameplay loop/mechanics/structure - whatever. Ideally you want to get as close as possible to that idea but realistically a lot of stuff will be dialed back and cut. Sometimes it's material for shareholders or the publisher to seek funding but we're focusing on Anthem now.
So thanks to the enormous marketing machinery required for AAA titles, EA probably wanted to show something early on for E3 and the rest is history. In the end the marketing folks decide when something is being shown, even if it's just the game logo.
Absolutely, that was something else to say the least.
The question and answer by the dev was:
"Is the [gameplay] we've seen so far still representative of the game?" His question stemming from a trend of titles downgrading game visuals compared to when they were first announced. The first half of Holmes' response, a brief "Yep!," was exciting to hear.
So they didn't "literally say it won't be downgraded". As far as I know Anthem is representative of what we saw in the trailer, albeit not without differences.
Last edited:
I think the mod need to change the title Killzone 2 as nothing to do with Anthem demo, it is vertical slice against true gameplay. A better question would be do we need to change how the game are presented maybe Nintendo direct presentation are the best way to go and show a game when it is ready...
You may end up being right OP, however:
1. The game is not out yet.
2. The VIP demo had issues that BioWare is fixing (apparently).
I'll wait for the full release to verify. Graphically the game looks like the reveal, so it beats Watch Dogs at that.
1. The game is not out yet.
2. The VIP demo had issues that BioWare is fixing (apparently).
I'll wait for the full release to verify. Graphically the game looks like the reveal, so it beats Watch Dogs at that.
I've played Destiny before, thanks.
I've also seen Colonial Marines style vertical slices before.
Okay, but, the framing and presentation of them is always "hey look, running on real hardware/real-time!".
The misleading entry into setting expectations is done on purpose to woo at game shows. That ends up causing the mess at the other end when the devs and pubs know for a fact this is not running as is, with the end product, on consoles. Or heck, sometimes even PCs can't manage the heights of the vertical slice.
Buyers expect changes and often some downgrades or compromises, but the extent to which some slices are framed and presented can't be blamed on the greater community when the YouTube comparisons are done 12~36 months later.
Yes, sometimes things like puddle-gate are petty bullshit, but other times you can't just say "vertical slice!" to defend the heights of some of the things displayed at E3/wherever else. You have to know fine well as a developer at that moment you are never meeting that expectation on a console, or coming close.
Last edited:
The thing you have to understand is almost every game developer engages in this practice. Vertical slices are the standard in the industry, as much as people hate them. No game is ever "complete" when being shown at E3.
Oh.
But as someone has posted earlier in this thread, an official statement was given insisting that its running real time on Xbox One X.
Bioware hasn't made a good game since mass effect 2... Imo of course. And before that the last good title was KOTOR.
Really spotty studio.
Really spotty studio.
Nobody forces them to display graphics that are not doable on consoles in their vertical slices. They know the specs of these things for years now. This isn't about games shown being "complete", it's about them showing stuff to entice people that won't be in the final game. I'm understanding quite well, thank you.
Most developers engage in the practice of having vertical slices. A lot of them don't resort to false advertising while doing so.
The AI doesn't work like in the e3 demo, even from a gameplay perspective it looks worse, they showed a living breathing world with enemies going about their day and in the demo all I saw was enemies standing around not doing anything or straight up disappearing.
Fair enough, I understand what you mean. To me that's just bad communication and overzealous marketing at worst. I personally don't feel deceived unless something like the Destiny reveal happens where I feel like we only got 20% of their envisioned game.
I think the problem is that some vertical slices are so overdone and clearly out of what consoles can do.
Like almost all games got downgraded and it's something expected, but it's not the same a game that gets toned down in lighting or textures than what we see in the first Anthem trailer where it's lighting, texture, geometry, AI, animals running around, more complex collision with the scenery... I mean I very much doubt that was running on an X when they did that even though they claimed it.
Downgrades are expected by everyone nowadays but I think you gotta be more careful with what you show.
i am FURIOUS at this turn of events! fool cant get fooled again
This, while factually accurate, somehow sounds like, "oh well, it is what it is".
https://youtu.be/zQhbHwkMSA4
Yeah Taker I mean stuff that is more outwith the realms of reasonable. Puddlegate and gamers zooming in on textures of socks, door knobs and some shadows and flipping their shit isn't reasonable.
Presenting something as running on an Xbox One X and then it's quite different is going to cause a bit more of a ruckus. What was shown at E3 for Anthem, running on an Xbox One X, isn't even matched by a PC (as far as I can see). Devs must have known this render was simply outside the realms of achievable on the One X.
Then obviously your Aliens Colonial Marines is up there as some of the most deceiving you can get besides Watchdogs. Killzone 2 still has that top spot because of how bad of a lie it was, irrespective of how good Killzone 2 ended up looking for a PS3. So comparing Killzone 2 to others is just unfair.
I'll be honest here, the visuals are pretty close to what was shown, but the hub area in the beginning was no where near as bustling or interactive as it was shown to be here. The game world itself has far less polish and far less liveliness than what was shown.
Generally speaking, if the initial showing was Anthem at 100% (as in 100% of what they were aiming the game to be, not 100% as in 100% complete by any means), the demo was at about a 75%.
Generally speaking, if the initial showing was Anthem at 100% (as in 100% of what they were aiming the game to be, not 100% as in 100% complete by any means), the demo was at about a 75%.
1. "Everyone does [crappy business practice]" has never been a good excuse.
2. There are different levels of misleading game reveals and it's wrong to equate them as all the same. There's downsampling from super-high resolutions and cranking stuff like the screen space reflections, and then there's stuff like No Man's Sky. I don't recall Mass Effect or Battlefield having as nearly a big a gulf between reveal and actual product.
3. This isn't a case of the game being incomplete and them having to fill the gaps with what they might think the final product will be like. Compressing a quest/dungeon down to 3 minute cliffnotes, scripted moments like wildlife appearances rather than random encounters, scene-specific animations - those are aspects of a vertical slice. This is going out of their way to make the graphics better than the hardware had any chance of supporting for a marketing benefit.
Am I missing seomthing? That isn't far off what I've been paying th past few days. I don't get it. Just because the foliage isn't quite as dense?
Killzone 2 and Watch Dogs were straight up CG
Killzone 2 and Watch Dogs were straight up CG
Nah Dragon Age Origins was fantastic. But yea since ME2 it's been depressing seeing what they've churned out
I think it's mostly about the first two minutes of the trailer set in the hub world than the gameplay proper.
Haha while it looks good the city's graphical effects are definitely scaled back, didn't such amazing animations from mobs, the landscape shot from outside looks crazy good in this video and no loading screens!
Also the UI seemed and audio seemed way better too.
They pulled the same thing as the inital trailer for the Division basically...
Also the UI seemed and audio seemed way better too.
They pulled the same thing as the inital trailer for the Division basically...
Last edited:
Then stop putting that little blurb on the video about "running in realtime on real hardware, etc.". THAT'S the deceptive part that's done on purpose to wow the crowds and you can spin it all you want but it needs to stop.
It is pretty odd how often and regularly it happens. Why hasn't consumer rights watchdogs or government agencies looked at it?
Yup, this is pretty drastic. I wouldn't put it on the same level as Killzone 2 (that thing was 100% CG, after all) but it's right up there with Watch Dogs. Maybe worse since it seems EA didn't learn anything from the backlash Ubisoft got. This is really bad.Not the exact same locations but the difference in lighting and physics objects density is particularly egregious. Don't know why people are defending this as "lol, it's your fault for not knowing demos are total lies".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAm8eNl1iD8
Not the exact same locations but the difference in lighting and physics objects density is particularly egregious. Don't know why people are defending this as "lol, it's your fault for not knowing demos are total lies".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAm8eNl1iD8
I always knew that it was not going to look like that. Just the lightning and level of detail was a clear indicator.
I also think that the demo is very close to the overall vibe of the initial presentation. I think it still looks good but ...yeah, seeing your comparison made the differences much more clear. Thank you.
Still, this is not like KZ2, that was CGI. And the actual game in here looks very good, compared to the terrible IQ of Watchdogs.
Yeah the moment i saw the reveal trailer i knew that its not gonna be nowhere close to it.
But the difference between the trailer hub and the real hub is just ooof.
But the difference between the trailer hub and the real hub is just ooof.
Not the exact same locations but the difference in lighting and physics objects density is particularly egregious. Don't know why people are defending this as "lol, it's your fault for not knowing demos are total lies".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAm8eNl1iD8
While I don't think the actual footage on the right looks "bad" by any means, the differences are pretty egregious. Vertical-slice demos are almost always "if we had infinite money and time" targets, which is shitty because that's all people have to go on.
Yeah the hub world is a fair bit more barren but I mean, is that hub world all that important in the game? Isn't the meat of the game in the javelin?
true, and putting this at the start of a trailer is an issue
I also remember one of the devs saying the reveal was not total BS.
After playing the demo I'm like...
Gotta love those sweet sweet lies.
Not the exact same locations but the difference in lighting and physics objects density is particularly egregious. Don't know why people are defending this as "lol, it's your fault for not knowing demos are total lies".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAm8eNl1iD8
Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
They fucked this shit up bad.
Honestly, I don't see how anybody could possibly believe that gameplay was real. It boggles my mind. It was so obviously faked, the animation was fake beyond belief, with CGI-like quality and downright choreographed, the crowd system in that video was above anything a team of humans could craft in a lifetime and beyond the amount of animations that could be implemented in a lifetime, the open world streaming and scripting was beyond anything the Frostbite engine has been known to produce, and it comes from the developer and publisher that gave us Mass Effect Andromeda, the game so bad, janky and broken it became a meme, also after a beautiful and faked presentation.
Seriously, if anyone believed that demo was real, it's entirely on them.
As for the final game, I don't know why anyone would want to buy it when Warframe scratches the same itch, for free.
It doesn't matter if people know they're bullshit, they shouldn't do these in the first place.
It's misleading, and posts like this that seem to be trying to justify them aren't helpful either.
You need to rewatch that Killzone 2 announcement trailer...
Edit:
So I'll elaborate on what I said:
The Anthem trailer looks about as good as the game running on ultra on pc.
The difference is in the density of effects and assets. Essentially it runs at in game cinematic levels of detail, but is very much seems to be the game engine running.
The same can be said for Watchdogs, though it was certainly worse and here you could talk about false advertising.
There can be many reasons for this, maybe they couldn't get a stable framerate, or maybe it was just too labor intensive to build the whole game to that level.
The Killzone 2 trailer isn't Killzone 2, it is a proof-of-concept CGI cinematic probably made by the same guys who made KZ1's intro.
The geometric detail, the high resolution volumetric effects and the insane texture quality wasn't possible on any system back then, and certainly not the PS3.
The "demo" was never a game, it was never a game engine, it was never running at 2fps on a devkit or anything like that.
In conclusion, The cutbacks seen on Anthem and Watchdogs are reasonable given time constraints and the need to have a similar product on all platforms.
The KZ2 demo was just fantasy.
(I would like to add that I very much liked KZ2, and that it was a fantastically good looking game when it launched).
Edit:
So I'll elaborate on what I said:
The Anthem trailer looks about as good as the game running on ultra on pc.
The difference is in the density of effects and assets. Essentially it runs at in game cinematic levels of detail, but is very much seems to be the game engine running.
The same can be said for Watchdogs, though it was certainly worse and here you could talk about false advertising.
There can be many reasons for this, maybe they couldn't get a stable framerate, or maybe it was just too labor intensive to build the whole game to that level.
The Killzone 2 trailer isn't Killzone 2, it is a proof-of-concept CGI cinematic probably made by the same guys who made KZ1's intro.
The geometric detail, the high resolution volumetric effects and the insane texture quality wasn't possible on any system back then, and certainly not the PS3.
The "demo" was never a game, it was never a game engine, it was never running at 2fps on a devkit or anything like that.
In conclusion, The cutbacks seen on Anthem and Watchdogs are reasonable given time constraints and the need to have a similar product on all platforms.
The KZ2 demo was just fantasy.
(I would like to add that I very much liked KZ2, and that it was a fantastically good looking game when it launched).
Last edited: