By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - “Downgrades article Is Often Misleading and Always Obnoxious

Tagged games:

 

What is your thought about the article

I am fully agree with the article 4 33.33%
 
I am agree on some mater but not everything 5 41.67%
 
I am not agree with article 3 25.00%
 
I just dont understand what is wrong here. 0 0%
 
Total:12

    Aparantly one gaming media  does not agree with all the downgrade issues for every next gen games. I read an articel in Dualshockersjust now :

 "The Witch Hunt for Downgrades is Often Misleading and Always Obnoxious"

No no there is  nothing to do with my own thread about ( http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=202585&page=1), and also i am not complaining with the games. but more of less about how Dualshocker defending games industry.

Let be honest here Asssins Cread Unity, Killzone 2 (PS3 earlier demo), RYSE, Watch Dog and you name it, is an example of how the final games look very far from  "promises and hype " the publisher shows us on earlier footage.

The problem is that the article mentioned that the problem is in consumer that over hype the games, and dont know how hard developing some games

" When a game is first shown, often years before release, most of the elements I listed above are not final. Placeholder assets are used all over the place in order to create something to display. Effects and shaders are often dragged in from previous games in order to complete a scene, gameplay elements are barebone if they are even there, and only a minimal part of the world is implemented.

It’s simply not realistic to demand for final games to look identical to what was shown close to the beginning of their development. Not only most of the elements aren’t finished at the time of a game’s first showing, but all platforms evolve rather radically in the one-to-three years span between a title’s reveal and its release. New APIs are introduced, new features are made available to developers and so forth. Engines themselves evolve, adding a further degree of complexity to the issue.Some will probably say “then developers shouldn’t shoot so high with their reveals!” But where do you draw the line? How do you predict wherethe platform(s) will be in three years? How do you assess what kind of technical solutions your coders will devise in between 365 and 1095 days at their desk?

The whole “downgrade” hubbub, though, isn’t just inaccurate, it’s also obnoxious and toxic. It creates often unwarranted negativity that affects the perception of a game in a way that most of the times isn’t justified.

A lot of the games that received accusations of “downgrades” – and The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is just the latest example of many – look absolutely beautiful, but the perception of that beauty has been altered in the minds of many by the allegation that there has been a downgrade, and that gamers somehow received a sub-par product. This simply couldn’t be further from the truth."

 He also think that gaming media outlet that judge games based on early build (like Digital foundry ) is a click bait article that's not represent the games quality.

" If you examine the typical article or forum post about downgrades, you’ll notice that it follows pretty much always the same formula: it’ll include a few screenshots (often ripped from super-compressed videos and livestreams), showcasing some elements that look arguably worse compared to previous showings of the game, then the author will call it a downgrade and call it a day.

That way of approaching the issue is simply inaccurate, as it cherry picks just a few elements of an image that fit the “downgrade” agenda, without considering the whole picture.

A game’s screen isn’t composed just by those elements, but by the combination of all the models, textures, effects, lighting, shaders and so forth. Without analyzing the entirety of those elements, pointing fingers to a few and screaming “downgrade!” is simply misleading.The usual “downgrade hunter” will see the first effect change arguably for the worse, photoshop a nice circle around it on the screenshot, and start screaming “downgrade!”Of course he won’t notice the elements of the picture that have been improved, or he will neglect pointing them out. But that’s not a downgrade. It’s a trade-off. And trade-offs are at the very core of game development. Thousands are made during the course of a title’s coding, but what people point out are pretty much always what are (more often than not incorrectly) defined “downgrades.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2015/05/10/the-witch-hunt-for-downgrades-is-often-misleading-and-always-obnoxious/

Overal i am agree in some point of the writer intentions, like for example that some articles  like to overblown simple mater without assesing the problem of the downgrade and cherry picking and only looking for click bait, or fanboys war.

But it's also a mistake that came from the publisher it self. If the publisher is really honest and open by including some text on their earlier footage and claim the final product will not be the same, i think it will at least avoid this problem.

So tell me what is your thought about the article.



Around the Network

get people hyped on false product and then release the downgraded version because they'll still buy it


we've all done it and fell it for it and we all will continue to do so o.o



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick

I'm with the author to an extent. The developers have to show the public something, and often what they show is either placeholder assets or high quality assets that will have to be adjusted later. Now, it was completely obvious from the moment the first trailer was released that the console versions would never look like what they advertised. I mean come on guys, these consoles were outdated the moment they came out.

However, I understand that as a consumer it feels like a bait and switch. Developers need to be more transparent in their videos/imagery about what is and isn't placeholder.

The amount of threads complaining about "downgrades" as of late has really gotten out of line.



PwerlvlAmy said:
get people hyped on false product and then release the downgraded version because they'll still buy it


we've all done it and fell it for it and we all will continue to do so o.o

Are you going to get Xenoblade Chronicle X?

It happens. The problem is that the developers keep on showing early "target" footage of the games. As production progesses, they realize the hardware isn't up to par and things need to be sacrificed or altered in order to keep performance at a level that is enjoyable.

What developers need to stop doing is announce their games years in advance of release. So these kind of reactions from gamers don't happen as strongly.

I'm not saying these reactions aren't justified. I think they're overblown way out of proportions, but it's normal to be disappointed when things don't turn as good as what the developers brought you to expect. But in the end, it's not like the end results are bad in any way. So it really doesn't affect me when all is said and done. 



I agree to an extent. It is unreasonable to expect games to look the same from early footage to final release. Stuff happens; sometimes the technical stuff needs to be trimmed back. This is realistic and OK. The problem arises when trailers are faked to hide the downgrades until post-launch or the downgrades are senseless. I also find the obsession over minor changes that are not very noticeable when the game is in motion causes disproportionate responses. The concern should be for the overall visual experience in motion. The problem with these articles is largely their tone which is designed to grab max clicks through outrage culture, not to inform the consumer about meaningful issues. However, I have no issue with people reporting downgrades when significant and/or serious due to coverup issues.



Around the Network
Hynad said:
PwerlvlAmy said:
get people hyped on false product and then release the downgraded version because they'll still buy it


we've all done it and fell it for it and we all will continue to do so o.o

Are you going to get Xenoblade Chronicle X?

It happens. The problem is that the developers keep on showing early "target" footage of the games. As production progesses, they realize the hardware isn't up to par and things need to be sacrificed or altered in order to keep performance at a level that is enjoyable.

What developers need to stop doing is announce their games years in advance of release. So these kind of reactions from gamers don't happen as strongly.

I'm not saying these reactions aren't justified. I think they're overblown way out of proportions, but it's normal to be disappointed when things don't turn as good as what the developers brought you to expect. But in the end, it's not like the end results are bad in any way. So it really doesn't affect me when all is said and done. 


I think all the reactions are perfectly justified and yeah I'll get XCX,which is why i included myself in the list if people along with everyone else who will continue falling for all the developers downgrades lol



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick

Call me developer's bitch but I'll buy Witcher and XCX. I really don't care about all the downgrades. Sad, but true



Click HERE and be happy 

Negativity brings in the hits. Hits = $$$. As long as people keep being baited into clicking these BS articles it'll keep happening.



"Say what you want about Americans but we understand Capitalism.You buy yourself a product and you Get What You Pay For."  

- Max Payne 3

Still its false marketing. If the game takes so much type to develop then they need to show it later. They show premature trailers to create hype.



Hynad said:
PwerlvlAmy said:
get people hyped on false product and then release the downgraded version because they'll still buy it


we've all done it and fell it for it and we all will continue to do so o.o

Are you going to get Xenoblade Chronicle X?

It happens. The problem is that the developers keep on showing early "target" footage of the games. As production progesses, they realize the hardware isn't up to par and things need to be sacrificed or altered in order to keep performance at a level that is enjoyable.

What developers need to stop doing is announce their games years in advance of release. So these kind of reactions from gamers don't happen as strongly.

I'm not saying these reactions aren't justified. I think they're overblown way out of proportions, but it's normal to be disappointed when things don't turn as good as what the developers brought you to expect. But in the end, it's not like the end results are bad in any way. So it really doesn't affect me when all is said and done. 

I agree, games are often shown of too early.

Although usually Nintendo does upgrades instead of downgrades (Metroid Prime 1, 2 and 3, Yoshi's Woolly World are some of the examples I can think of). Oh and Metroid Fusion, that game looked like shit when it was first announced.

I hope to include Zelda U in this list.