Demo Graphics Downgrade

purifyweirdshard

Yeah that's the best pic to use if you want to point out a downgrade.

I tried to do a comparison using shapes so people can focus in on important areas for points.





Circle

In the circle you can notice the background details had a foggy hue to them originally. It gave the backgrounds more depth and beauty.

Triangle
You can see loads more detail in objects. From the blood details on the bottom of the columns to even little things like the stairs just looking nicer.

Rectangle
Lighting effects. The lighting effects were far far far more prominent originally. It gave the environments loads more life but without those lighting effects it feels very lifeless.

I hope this helps.

Angel-Corlux This is probably the clearest cut comparison. That's not to say visuals haven't improved though because the boat probably is the clearest example of how much it's gotten better with details and lighting. For whatever reason though the castle entrance went downhill. Most people on forums when they saw that first pic thought the game was great looking visually and the move away from that style hurt it I think. I don't know if it's just too much work to get it at that level and deliver the game on time but I have a feeling if the game looked like that all around people wouldn't complain AT ALL about the visuals.

That image is from January 2016 so you could definitely make the case that its outdated.


However this video is from june 2017 and the entrance with the statue looked a whole lot better than it does currently.

That's when they were still conceptualizing everything though, and polling backers on what lighting system to use. They hadn't actually started designing the castle afaik, and that area wasn't actually shown playable in any capacity.

estebant's example I think is more appropriate because 1. it's more easily obtainable and 2. It's clearly something they had working and preparing for the game so it really begs the question why they went backwards on what they already had. Where the 2016 example is a concept, this one was actually actionable and playable and is mysteriously downgraded. We'd really like to know why.

Sadly in neither 2017 or 2018's instance does Miriam's model look as good as it did in 2016 v.v

lovelydumpling

I rather push the example that best represented the game conceptual or not than push the second best thing. If they can't hit the conceptualized idea fine but at least push the one thing where it looked it's absolute best.  Aim high so you can get the best out of the project, don't aim mid tier.

As i've already said, let's not act like they couldn't get close to hitting that shot because the boat was GREATLY improved visually and looks somewhat comparable to that 2016 shot. It's got great lighting, LOADS of effects, and color.

But what lovelydumpling and estebant are saying is that the asking to know the differences between a non-working concept screen and a playable demo will only get us the answer "well, one is a concept and the other is the best we could do with the actual game."

But clearly they can do better with the actual game, as proven by the 2017 protoype, which is why it is our best point of reference for asking why the graphics were downgraded.

Anyway, I mean, looking at the facts, I think the reason's fairly obvious...

1. The character models were downgraded, in terms of polygons, textures and lighting.
2. The backgrounds were downgraded, in terms of polygons, textures and lighting.

And, would you look at this here...


Conclusion: they dropped the quality of the visuals before entering mass production because of either the cost of producing them at that quality, or in order to be able to use the same assets in the Switch and Vita versions, or alternatively (but less likely) in lower spec-ed PCs.

This is somewhat irritating, as they claimed to have switched developers in order to achieve a higher level of quality. Now, to be fair, Inti would probably not have been able to complete the game to begin with, but still...we get what's going to amount to a two-year delay to get the visuals "at the right quality," and we get a drop in graphics quality? And no mention of this until we compare the graphics side-by-side? ... *sigh*...

EDIT: You guys know what's particularly irritating? Lower spec-ed platforms (Wii-u then Switch, Vita), one of the likely reasons for the downgrade in graphics quality, and a gazillion game modes that half the people won't play - and are likely also a reason for the delay - were all stretch goals they added without thinking about the consequences...

All of this highlights the importance of thinking your stretch goals through, and also knowing when to stop.

Everything is entirely too shiny in that 2016 screenshot. I do see some textures that look better in the 2016 picture, but there are also textures that look better in the current shot. IMO, changing the temperature of the lighting (as mentioned a bit upthread, playing when one's computer has lowered the monitor's temperature does improve the looks) and nudging the contrast up a smidge would make it look very nice indeed.

dareka I'd upvote that part about stretch goals at least nine million times