Why does Dark Souls 2 now look like a PS2 game?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by Pffrbt (6527 posts) -

I really hope the PC version looks like how the initial demo did, because how it looks on consoles currently is terrible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykbT03r_9Zo

#2 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10284 posts) -

Okay.....

#3 Posted by PFCMike (1 posts) -

I am not impressed with the dark souls games. I can't understand how they are rated so highly.

#4 Edited by blamix99 (1668 posts) -

your exaggerating..

#5 Posted by Kevlar101 (6052 posts) -

Of course, this happens NOW.

After years of hearing people praise Dark Souls and Demon Souls, and how I should totally play them........just today, I finally decide to get in on the action and decided to buy Dark Souls II.

And now, I am hearing criticisms.

What timing. I am still gonna buy it, but damn.

#6 Edited by JangoWuzHere (16084 posts) -

Maybe you should go back and actually see what a PS2 game looks like.

#7 Posted by Bigboi500 (29286 posts) -

Yeah it's ugly.

#8 Edited by Pffrbt (6527 posts) -

Maybe you should go back and actually see what a PS2 game looks like.

Maybe you should stop taking what I said literally and realize that I said "looks like a PS2 game" to emphasize how much worse it looks now compared to how it did when they first showed it off.

#9 Edited by Ariabed (1102 posts) -

I think it's to improve frame rate

#10 Posted by cooolio (449 posts) -

OK, that is bad. Someone compared them before, and I thought that was as bad as it would get but the comparison above is horrible. I get how people are saying Watch Dogs looks bad now, but I am waiting to see how it looks when it is released on next gen, but Dark Souls 2 has been caught after release. They should have at least said something first. Lies are wrong.

#11 Posted by Pffrbt (6527 posts) -

@ariabed said:

I think it's to improve frame rate

Apparently the framerate is still caught between 20 and 30 fps. I really don't care how the console version looks or runs, but I'll be severely disappointed if the PC version doesn't look as good as that initial demo, because there's no excuse for it not to.

#12 Edited by platinumking320 (666 posts) -

Yeah it's ugly.

Unless its Snake Eater or Silent Hill 2 thru 4. Talk about 'making a dollar out of fifteen cents', that was some impressive artwork.

#13 Posted by KHAndAnime (13388 posts) -

The Souls games could have probably been down on the PS2 if downgraded enough.

#14 Posted by JangoWuzHere (16084 posts) -

@Pffrbt said:

@JangoWuzHere said:

Maybe you should go back and actually see what a PS2 game looks like.

Maybe you should stop taking what I said literally and realize that I said "looks like a PS2 game" to emphasize how much worse it looks now compared to how it did when they first showed it off.

Still doesn't look like a PS2 game.

#15 Posted by Pffrbt (6527 posts) -

@Pffrbt said:

@JangoWuzHere said:

Maybe you should go back and actually see what a PS2 game looks like.

Maybe you should stop taking what I said literally and realize that I said "looks like a PS2 game" to emphasize how much worse it looks now compared to how it did when they first showed it off.

Still doesn't look like a PS2 game.

Ok.

#16 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10284 posts) -

^Thats My Line^ ! :(

#17 Posted by MirkoS77 (7129 posts) -

Looks like an Xbox game. Better?

#18 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (631 posts) -

tbh, all the footage I've seen I assumed it was early stage clips.

are the clips actually from the newly released version?

#19 Posted by Gargus (2147 posts) -

@Pffrbt said:

@JangoWuzHere said:

Maybe you should go back and actually see what a PS2 game looks like.

Maybe you should stop taking what I said literally and realize that I said "looks like a PS2 game" to emphasize how much worse it looks now compared to how it did when they first showed it off.

You said it, in those exact words. And you offered no type of other commentary to show people you weren't being literal. Youre typing on the internet, people don't know what your intent or context is when you type because all they have to go by is what you say. So maybe youre the one who has an issue, and stop assuming that everyone on the planet knows exactly what your meaning is, especially when you actually wrote very little for them to go on.

2) If you are so focused on how a game looks then you shouldn't even bother playing dark souls 2 because you wont enjoy the game because it isn't slick, bright and shiny to distract you much like a shiny toy will a dog. It isn't the prettiest game but I like the dark/demons games because they are fun for me to play, I don't care about the graphics so much because unlike most I care more about the game itself and if its fun to play, if a game is fun to play because it looks good then usually its a hollow game.

#20 Posted by Jacanuk (4194 posts) -

@Pffrbt said:

I really hope the PC version looks like how the initial demo did, because how it looks on consoles currently is terrible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykbT03r_9Zo

Ok, thanks for telling us about your needs.

Not sure what anyone can do with it but im sure someone cares what you think or need.

The rest of the DS "hardcore" gaming group i am sure couldn´t give a shit what it looks like, its a Dark Souls game and thats what matters.

#21 Posted by turtlethetaffer (16669 posts) -

Honestly I don't see it. Dark Souls is a good looking game to me. No, it's not the best technically but people overblow it a lot.

#22 Posted by Alicelewis11 (7 posts) -

I am waiting to see how it looks when it is released on next gen, but Dark Souls 2 has been caught after release.

#23 Edited by Some-Mist (5630 posts) -

I think it's not properly optimized to promote buying a ps4/xb1. regardless, you shouldn't be playing the souls games for graphics... but I did notice a lot of insanely bad looking textures too.

gameplay and difficulty is still perfect.

#24 Edited by Shinobishyguy (22416 posts) -

If they're gonna be coming out with a next gen version I expect some compensation for those who want to double dip. The game is excellent but damn does it look murky most of the time

#25 Posted by Ariabed (1102 posts) -

@Pffrbt: @Pffrbt: I haven't got a clue about PC gaming but I'm sure I read that you will be able to adjust the visual settings, but anyway graphics isn't a big deal to me gameplay is most important. As long as graphics are half descent, and as proven by Dark souls story isn't that important either. That is all

#26 Edited by Pffrbt (6527 posts) -

@Jacanuk: @Gargus: "You said it, in those exact words. And you offered no type of other commentary to show people you weren't being literal."

I would hope I would be able to give people the benefit of the doubt that an obvious exaggeration would be enough to tip them off that I'm not being 100% dead serious. In either case, I don't care.

"If you are so focused on how a game looks then you shouldn't even bother playing dark souls 2"

I enjoyed the other Souls games. I'll just be disappointed that this one doesn't look nearly as good as I know it could've.

"Ok, thanks for telling us about your needs.

Not sure what anyone can do with it but im sure someone cares what you think or need."

Thank you for your condescending and dismissive attitude.

#27 Posted by HipHopBeats (2873 posts) -

Maybe you should go back and actually see what a PS2 game looks like.

True story. I recently revisited GTA SA and that game did not age well graphically.

#28 Posted by fend_oblivion (6113 posts) -

@Pffrbt said:

@ariabed said:

I think it's to improve frame rate

Apparently the framerate is still caught between 20 and 30 fps. I really don't care how the console version looks or runs, but I'll be severely disappointed if the PC version doesn't look as good as that initial demo, because there's no excuse for it not to.

After the crappy port that was Prepare to Die Edition, I'm not sure I can trust From Software to release a decent Dark Souls 2 port.

And yes, the lighting and some of the textures have been downgraded. According to Digital Foundry, Dark Souls 2 runs at 720p compared to the sub-HD resolution of Dark Souls 1. They dialed down the graphics so that the game would run better. Even if the framerate is 20-30, it is much better than Blighttown's single digit frames.

#29 Posted by foxhound_fox (87623 posts) -

@PFCMike said:

I am not impressed with the dark souls games. I can't understand how they are rated so highly.

Because they challenge the player to think and explore, rather than telling them where to go and holding their hand and rewarding the simplest of actions completed.

And TC, you must never have played a PS2 game, because none of the Souls games look anything like things on the PS2. Not even close.

#30 Posted by Minishdriveby (9734 posts) -

Of course, this happens NOW.

After years of hearing people praise Dark Souls and Demon Souls, and how I should totally play them........just today, I finally decide to get in on the action and decided to buy Dark Souls II.

And now, I am hearing criticisms.

What timing. I am still gonna buy it, but damn.

People are criticizing the lighting, but then in the same breath are calling it an amazing game. Demon's Souls and Dark Souls are amazing. People might be underwhelmed by the lighting and graphics of DaSII, but I wouldn't say textures and lighting was the main draw of DaS to begin with. I mean the original DaS had some textures that looked N64 era. Sure it's a shame that the released version doesn't have the same fidelity as a previous build, but it's not something that will destroy the game like many seemed worked up about.

#31 Edited by Minishdriveby (9734 posts) -

@Pffrbt said:

@JangoWuzHere said:

Maybe you should go back and actually see what a PS2 game looks like.

Maybe you should stop taking what I said literally and realize that I said "looks like a PS2 game" to emphasize how much worse it looks now compared to how it did when they first showed it off.

Still doesn't look like a PS2 game.

How 'bout 'dem leaf textures. Pretty close.

#32 Posted by c_rakestraw (14599 posts) -

It seems like only a few areas are really heavily impacted by this. I've still seen loads of sections that are simply breathtaking. Sure it might not look as great as it could have on the technical front, but damn if that fantastic art direction doesn't make up for it.

#33 Edited by Ish_basic (3998 posts) -

That image looks way clearer than what I'm playing on, especially the armor textures. Which version is this? Also, these enemy designs....honestly, Japan.

@JangoWuzHere said:

Still doesn't look like a PS2 game.

How 'bout 'dem leaf textures. Pretty close.

#34 Posted by Pffrbt (6527 posts) -

How 'bout 'dem leaf textures. Pretty close.

It's sad how well Leon fits into that picture.

#35 Posted by sukraj (22089 posts) -

The graphics look terrible

#36 Posted by Minishdriveby (9734 posts) -

That image looks way clearer than what I'm playing on, especially the armor textures. Which version is this? Also, these enemy designs....honestly, Japan.

@Minishdriveby said:

@JangoWuzHere said:

Still doesn't look like a PS2 game.

How 'bout 'dem leaf textures. Pretty close.

These were pre-release screens about a month before the game launched.

#37 Edited by Ohem1 (1 posts) -

Isn't it technically false or misleading advertising? If you look at the official screenshots from http://www.darksoulsii.com/us/ you won't see any information or proper representation about any heavy graphical downgrade/reduction on the site yet the developers were determined to release the game in it's current form. Neither their Facebook, Twitter, or Newspage say anything about the abundantly clear difference between the console and PC platform(s). They show and/or describe a game that should be comparable with each other.

I don't own a copy of Dark Souls 2, but is there anything in the warranty/ToS clearing this up?

On the other hand i found this:

Misleading Advertising

According to the Directive, misleading advertising is any advertising which, in any way, including in its presentation, is capable of:

  • deceiving the persons to whom it is addressed;
  • distorting their economic behaviour; or
  • as a consequence, harming the interests of competitors.

When determining whether advertising is misleading, several factors shall be taken into account. These are:

  • the characteristics of the goods or services concerned;
  • the price;
  • the conditions of delivery of the goods or provision of the services involved;
  • the nature, attributes and rights of the advertiser.

Comparative Advertising

The Directive lays down the conditions under which comparative advertising is permitted and, in particular, it requires traders to make sure that their advertisements:

  • are not misleading;
  • compare "like with like" - goods and services meeting same needs or intended for the same purpose;
  • objectively compare important features of the products or services concerned;
  • do not discredit other companies trademarks;
  • do not create confusion among traders.

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/consumer-marketing/unfair-trade/false-advertising/index_en.htm

I'm not particularly good with reading lawtexts but i think i found the closest thing.

What is a marketing practice?

A marketing practice is any representation or communication made by a trader in order to promote goods and services. It can be a TV commercial or press article, information on the website, an e-mail, or even direct marketing through a telephone call. It is similar to the concept of advertising, but includes also certain practices that are not easily recognised as advertising because the commercial intent is hidden (for example fake invoices that are in fact offers to conclude a contract).

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-900_en.htm?locale=en

#38 Edited by TQ_NintyNoE (1671 posts) -

Graphics aren't everything, though I'll be honest - I was shocked at the YouTube footage and how awful some of the graphics actually looked. The textures look blurred and low res, and the use of polygons seemed to have gone awry somewhere along the line, as round pillars look jagged. I could have easily seen similar quality on the GameCube or Xbox, which for the time was brilliant, but is now extremely lacking. This is 2014 and at their best games shouldn't look like launch titles for the 360:

Still, if the game plays well then fair enough. People get jumpy for two reasons:

1) Graphics immerse you more, and the lower the quality the more the feeling that you've been ripped off.

2) The potential of false advertising