Why pre-rendered game trailers are unhelpful for game reveals and create unneeded expectations.
Prerendered trailers are fine, so long as you don't try to pass it off as in game.
See I disagree. Let's take the Battlefront example, that isn't how the game is going to look or play like. It is far to fluid and natural. It isn't telling us anything about the final product. It is a PR move that is part of an outdated practice. Gone are the times were magazines pushed this type of content as a way of building hype. Before launch gameplay would have to be shown as it is easy to get that information now. The pre rendered/cgi/in game assets trailer is an outdated form of PR. I think it shows a lack of confidence in the product
they are a relic of game development days of old when pre-rendered footage was still the best way of showing off your game. Graphics just couldn't keep up, and people needed something to get excited about. Now that graphics can match the presentation CG trailers, eg the order 1886, they are totally unnecessary.
if they can't show actual footage then it's too early to release a trailer and it gives false expectations to how the game will look. when ea showed madden that one year it was hilarious.
SOOO many laughable, negative people on this site that have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE WTF they're talking about.. how do you know it wont look like this????? My God lord, the amount of clueless haters are nauseating.. Folks that were THERE for the actual reveal have already said that it looks very close to this one the PS4 (probably even better on the PC)..
CG game trailers are fine. Just look at the Dead Island 2 trailer with the jogger. That was brilliant.
I agree. As long as the they don't blatantly say it's in game graphics. What they should do is say cinematic trailer or story trailer maybe.
But are there even real cinematic or story elements in the game?
Pre-rendered trailers are simply marketing tools. The sooner people get this, the sooner we can all move past it. For 90% of a game's development, it's not going to be even close to "final looking", until the end of production. Watch Dogs' original trailer for example was running on a high end PC and they were not shy about mentioning it. It was also a demo, so certain things were polished to a higher degree than was feasible for the rest of the game, but that was all in-game footage. Killzone 2's trailer was CGI through and through. That was a very early target render for what they wanted the final game to look like. Obviously, didn't end up being entirely truthful, but shit happens. Battlefront so far is a victim of its own hype. When they finally show off the in-engine trailer, people cry foul and immediately write it off as trying to somehow trick you into buying it. For the most part, it's been very well received by the press, the internet at large and developers from around the industry. I feel that if there was ever any real cause for alarm, it sure as hell hasn't happened yet.
Sorry but the final build of Killzone 2 was better then the E3 trailer. https://www.youtube.com/wat...
They look identical except for the big jarring fact the E3 trailer is being shown like a movie where scripted events run amok and situations that are literally impossible from happening in any game known to man, e.g. soldier being shot then hanging off the ledge with one hand, first person reactions in non context sensitive environment. This same reveal was what Bioshock: Infinite did when it debut, but we all know how drastically different the final product ended being from the initial "gameplay" trailer.
The final build did look better, but some people just don't want to accept that for some reason.
The Battlefront trailer was scripted, but not pre-rendered. It was real-time and in-engine. Pre-rendered means you "bake" the video frame by frame over a long period of time, like a 3D animation film. The only problem with the Battlefront trailer is that the environments shown in the trailer were 1000x more polished than what you'll get in the final game, and the demo was probably running on a nuclear computer at More-Than-Ultra settings. So it's not at all representative of what we'll get when the game comes out. I can guarantee that if that demo was made publicly available, almost no one would be able to run it at more than 10 fps
I agree with your thoughts on the in-engine demo but the demo has been confirmed to be running on a PS4 and that it was pre-alpha and looked really good but obviously not as good as the trailer. @Timesplitter14 Not the trailer, that is simply a video. The DEMO was confirmed to be being played on Ps4's in pre-alpha
if that trailer has been "confirmed" to be running on a PS4, I simply do not believe them and I know I am right
It was not real time, It was rendered via an engine, similar to how blender can have a render mode and a game-mode in engine... The render would allow you to add a lot of details to it, including textures, model settings, draw distances, objects on screen, while the game side you would need to disable many of these features to get it to run at a playable frame rate...
If this was Ubisoft then I would call bullshit, but Dice has delivered in the graphics department in the past with BF4 and I have no doubt this is how the game will look. Amother hard up site trying to drum up business is all this article is.
at the end of the day i have faith in dice.especially after everything they went thru with battlefield 4.people forget that they were facing lawsuits and everything else for BF4'S launch but i think both DICE and EA learned alot from that experience and it shows in BF Hardline even tho DICE technically didnt develop it.Life is a learning experience and sometimes you need to go thru rough times and learn lessons the hard way(BF4) to evolve and become better(Potentially BattleFront). Id go as far to say that right now, BF4 and BF Hardline are the best First person competitive shooters that you can get right now when it comes to the big G'S ,Gameplay and Graphics
Experienced gamers can smell bullshit like the trailer for Battlefront miles away. But so many are now thinking it will look just like the trailer and are pre-ordering. And that's just sad.
Did you feel the same when Battlefield 3 was revealed? I did! Battlefield 4? What have changed since? * New consoles * Close to metal APIs (Mantle -> Vulkan, DX12) - Battlefield 4 was the first game to release on Mantle - Star Wars Battlefront might be the first game that really takes advantage of these. * New rendering techniques (PBR, photogrametry) - one of the first to use both We will se...
I would only agree with this if pre-rendered trailers were all we were shown before a game's release. In that case, we wouldn't know for sure what we would actually be playing. However, there's a big difference between a trailer/reveal/announcement vs gameplay reveal. It's not about being unhelpful. We know we will see Battlefront gameplay shortly. It just wasn't a part of that particular trailer. There as absolutely nothing wrong with the trailer as it is though. It gave us a glimpse of what to expect. But it doesn't even come into question that it was scripted. Nobody is forcing you to make a decision on a pre-order based on the trailer. Have some patience, use some common sense, and realize 99.9% of games today are revealed more and more *in the months leading up to release.*
for me its not just about the looks,im sure we're gonna hear about how battlefront has been downgraded etc sometime in the near future. graphics arent everything to me, especially not this gen. to me this gen has greatly lacked in the gameplay department and i hope DICE focuses on being sure the gameplay is fun and addictive.it seems like they'll have the "variety" aspect on-lock with all the different vehicles, weapons and characters you can use but for me gameplay is most important at this point in time,
Is that justification though?
As well as the visuals being 'enhanced' and not by much I expect. Battlefront Audio was mixed in a studio by Charles Deenan... all formats including Dolby Atmos. It could have been using in-game assets for all I know. But I do know it was mixed to perfection by Charles and gang. This does not mean I expect less from the Audio Team at Dice. They can work wonders.
Pre rendered trailers are only acceptable for games that are not far in development.
While i agree that prerendered trailers can be misleading, this one didnt bother me and shouldnt become the poster boy for whats wrong with this practice. if the final game ends up looking close then it's water under the bridge. On the other hand Ubisoft shows "in engine footage" that might as well be considered cinematics by the time of release. That is a far worse practice if you ask me. At least this didn't claim to show gameplay quality if it wasnt finalized yet.
Levelheaded reasonable responses have no place here. Jerk.
Another trick I noticed is a little more subtle, and I will use the upcoming batman game for example. A few months ago, the developer started showing footage of the game. If you watched closely, you could notice that some of the scenes were extremely polished, almost cgi quality, then it would transition to slightly more realistic in-game graphics. If you watch the actual gameplay footage released recently, you will notice that the cgi effect is now gone. Not only that, but the in game graphics are a tier below of what was shown a few months prior. The visuals still look excellent, but definitely not what was shown in the ACE chemical trailers a few months ago
I don't know why they just don't show the 5mins of gameplay they showed everyone else at the Star Wars celebration. Even though this is using the "in-game" engine it's still a trailer and makes the game look better. I want to see what the gameplay looks like with everyone on the map at 60fps like they said.
Watch this part of crysis 3. Still looks fantastic and reminds me of that vid. https://youtu.be/eQabT6L3zL...
I don't mind target rendered and cinematic trailers, but it'd be good if they were forced to contain a disclaimer (like makeup ads here in the UK) Something along the lines of: target/simulated footage of a work in progress title, may not represent the completed game." "not actual gameplay" goes a long way too.
I like them. I also want pre-rendered cutscenes back, not cheap, lazy in-game cutscenes.
I ask myself the question was this actual gameplay or cgi,my guess is cgi knowing it's possible for a powerful pc could pull off actual gameplay like the trailer.I don't think it's possible on current generation maybe close.Knowing this game will not feature a campaign,I will pass buying this game.
From ps4 exclusive games, id say the graphics on this trailer are mostly possible more than any platform on ps4. I think many people are forgetting that sony makes movies, so if any platform can produce cgi quality games; it's them and their platform. Also, people forget there is a VOLUMETRIC difference with the talents and technology of a filming company like lucas arts and any regular game developer that develop on any platforms such as ps4 normally, they are probably more along the lines of the developers sony had in mind when making the ps4 anyway. Lastly, from the way first gen ps4 games look; I don't see what is so great about these graphics that isn't possible on ps4. And those were by normal developers.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.