• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Fakest demos vs actual games ever?

SJRB

Gold Member
KSBc.gif



Pretty much every Kinekt game Microsoft tried to peddle back in the day.
 
CGI stuff is imho more tolerable than fake on stage "live gameplay" lies.
The first ones are usually far away from release so should never be trusted as being anything specific appearing in the game, and they possible themselves don't know how close they can get in the final product- it's just a target for themselves-, especially before the HW is even out proper, but once they pretend it's close to the final product, what you actually will get at home, it is deceitful and the above Kinect BS takes the cake for me.
 

Rykan

Member
Cyberpunk is not even in the same ballpark as killzone 2

Smoke and fire effects still looks better than most modern games out there.
Ehh I don't really think it's fair. The Killzone 2 trailer was very obviously CGI. Nothing about it looks like actual gameplay. There's not even a hud. IIRC, it was mistakenly reported as gameplay during an interview.
 
Last edited:

RoboFu

One of the green rats
That cyberpunk video is stupid. There are areas in the pc version at least where you see that many people and of course the different times of day make it seem drastically different.

With threads like this and all Spider-Man flak you guys seem to get off on hyperbolic negativity.
 
Last edited:

GymWolf

Member
Ehh I don't really think it's fair. The Killzone 2 trailer was very obviously CGI. Nothing about it looks like actual gameplay. There's not even a hud. IIRC, it was inaccurately reported as gameplay as a mistake in an interview.
I think it is perfectly fair, people was tricked by the first person view and it looked like that was an example of how the game should have ended looking.

If you don't wanna trick people, then make a generic war cg trailer and not something in first person that replicate how you play the game.

They knew exactly what they were doing with that trailer even if it was mismanaged.
 
Last edited:

supernova8

Banned
I think it is perfectly fair, people was tricked by the first person view and it looked like that was an example of how the game should have ended looking.

If you don't wanna trick people, then make a generic war cg trailer and not something in first person that replicate how you play the game.

They knew exactly what they were doing with that trailer even if it was mismanaged.
Also if I remember correctly the video and audio were off during the actual Killzone 2 CGI bullshit reveal, which kinda suggested to me at the time that ... maybe... it was all a big lie.

Ironically, Killzone 2 ended up looking great so I don't even understand why they felt the need to lie. Maybe they just didn't have the level anywhere near ready and came up with some CGI that looked like what they were kinda aiming for (that level is in the game right, it just doesn't look as good).

edit: I went back and watched the e3 2005 reveal and then the e3 2007 reveal and then actual gameplay from the released version. Looks like they downgraded it massively between e3 2005 and e3 2007 but also downgraded it a bit more in the retail release. Most obvious thing is the even shittier fire/explosion particles/animations for the famous sequence where one of the dropships gets blown out of the sky.
 
Last edited:

T4keD0wN

Member
I'll starts with Cyberpunk what a frunking let down

It should be illegals to do this


With crowd density on high the trailer is not far from the game. On the other hand the ai is still far from great even after the updates.

Anthem demo was apparently as fake as it gets. I am waiting for black myth wukong to join these ranks.
 
Last edited:

Cyberpunkd

Gold Member
A "work in progress" is expected to become a better, more polished version of itself by release, not dramatically worse than what is being showcased at that early stage.

Don't make excuses for the irredeemable shitshow that was Cyberpunk's entire marketing cycle.
The first previews are almost always a vertical slice of a game. At that point in time the full power was probably given to render that one scene with everything outside FoV not existing (they explained in the Witcher 3 GDC video how it is done most of the time, which is also a reason why FoV on consoles is so small). Likewise you can use the Witcher 3 trailer, they did the same thing.

Don't fall for marketing and hype machine.
 
I don't even understand why they felt the need to lie.
It was just their own target, probably not knowing exactly how far they will be able to push Cell and the nvidia crap themselves and Sony had to show something and impressing was necessary to catch up with MS's Halo and Gears or whatever they have shown then, so they went a bit too far in their optimism, nevertheless nailing the look and feel pretty good, just not with that fidelity. Downgrades happen and most of the time it's not tragic imho, people should just not believe anything before actual hands on demos of practically final products.
 

CGNoire

Member
Ehh I don't really think it's fair. The Killzone 2 trailer was very obviously CGI. Nothing about it looks like actual gameplay. There's not even a hud. IIRC, it was mistakenly reported as gameplay during an interview.
It has way less to do with there false claims as much as it is about the countless online fans claiming to this very day that the game matched it or even got close. Some of which are in this thread as we speak.
 
Last edited:

Rykan

Member
I think it is perfectly fair, people was tricked by the first person view and it looked like that was an example of how the game should have ended looking.

If you don't wanna trick people, then make a generic war cg trailer and not something in first person that replicate how you play the game.

They knew exactly what they were doing with that trailer even if it was mismanaged.
But there's plenty of games that had trailers taking place in first person that clearly use CGI. Bioshock 2 and Crysis are just two games that jump to mind.

The trailer doesn't replicate actual gameplay that much. There's no HUD, shots are fired off center and there's not even an aiming reticle. None of the camera movement or character movements make any sense from a gameplay perspective.
 
Last edited:

Evil Calvin

Afraid of Boobs
I'll starts with Cyberpunk what a frunking let down

It should be illegals to do this


They always say 'in development' or 'work in progress'. They also often build games with higher specs and downgrade them later. It's not illegal. That is development. If they showed a trailer after release that was nothing like the game then ok.
 

SF Kosmo

Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Ehh I don't really think it's fair. The Killzone 2 trailer was very obviously CGI. Nothing about it looks like actual gameplay. There's not even a hud. IIRC, it was mistakenly reported as gameplay during an interview.
They specifically claimed it was recorded from PS3 hardware. Which I think it was, albeit at like 2 fps and then played back at 30fps.
 

Toots

Gold Member
That cyberpunk video is stupid. There are areas in the pc version at least where you see that many people and of course the different times of day make it seem drastically different.

With threads like this and all Spider-Man flak you guys seem to get off on hyperbolic negativity.
First day on the internet ?

Anthem was one of the craziest downgrade ever, but let's not forget of course most of Ubisoft output...
 

StueyDuck

Member
Another bullshit trailer


This is always my go to. I remember watching it many many times.

Luckily the game lived up to expectations. Sure it wasn't graphically that good but it damn well delivered muddy dirty monster truck smashing high octane racing...

And then we got pacific Rift (crosses legs)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom