Yeah, it is so much better when nobody has any idea what your gameplay is like, I'm looking at you Avengers game. (Except for people behind closed doors and they promise the game is good, believe them)
There is a HUGE difference between W3 pre-rendered trailer that was marketed as gameplay and the final product that we got. Pretending to say otherwise is false.It makes some sense. Especially for Cyberpunk. The Witcher changes weren't even that huge and people were acting like CDPR lied to them.
Idk why they included Anthem in this article though, what were got wasn't even the same game they showed at E3. That was more than a downgrade
No idea why people keep bringing CP2077 here. In this case, CDPR themselves shared not just a couple of minutes but around 50 minutes of gameplay and when everyone expected them to show more, they chickened out.
I don't know, just would be nice to see actual gameplay. Now all the internet is focused on is how weird and discount the characters look.I don't get this take at all... the game is almost 11 months away. There's almost a year from now until the game releases for them to start a marketing campaign and show the game off. What difference does it make if they show it now or in 7 months?
If they showed raw footage of games in their current state now, it would just be glitchy or framey and end up with people complaining about something different (performance).Show actual gameplay and not bullshit footage then.
What happened with Anthem was a complete joke and it deserved all the hate it got.
This is why I prefer Nintendo. They get criticized for graphics, but they show gameplay in their trailers
Yeah, because getting slated for months for 'looking like shit' would be so much better for sales.How about not release gameplay on a beefed up PC and then when the game comes out, it's running on actual hardware?
I mean if they come out and tell us beforehand any dramatic changes, it should be fine. I think ND did something with uncharted 4 in regards to the teaser vs actual games. Dont remember but it wasn't that bad.
Maybe they should run games at 80% of their target so when it launches at 100% state, we are all good?
Funny thing....numerous times, people spot framerate drops in early Nintendo game footage, or rough looking early screenshots, but then when the game releases, it's fine. It's almost like this problem in reverse.thats why i hate when people say things like "oooff! tha framerate!!"
oh yeah? at least they aren;t lying to your face
Because their games look like their games
It's a transitional year and no ones ready to tip their hands on their next gen yet, too early. Next year will be huge.
It's the same cycle every time, people just have short term memories
Easy Solution:
- show actual gameplay from your WIP build and not sliced demos that took you 3 months to make it look pretty.
- underpromise overdeliver.
No offense to Nintendo but their games are hardly pushing the graphical envelope in the way big AAA games do.
That's fair, but what's the point of E3 when most of the games are like a 6-12 months out then?
Graphics arent a selling point for them, so they can afford not looking the best.
That's not the point. A downgrade would still be a downgrade and those who follow the production would instantly notice as much as with any other project.No offense to Nintendo but their games are hardly pushing the graphical envelope in the way big AAA games do.
The specs of the consoles are even finalized yet. And this gen literally started with a couple games aiming to high because of that and being blindsided when the consoles weren't as powerful as they assumed.I mean, I'm no developer but it doesn't seem unreasonable to want to see footage of a game due out in 3, 5, 8 months and not have to expect that what you're seeing may be scaled back for launch.
This is not the LOD quality of BOTW...