r/PS4 • u/cristi1990an cristi1990anRO • Sep 01 '18

[Video] [Video] BioWare Makes Fun of Marvel's Spider-Man's "PuddleGate" Controversy

https://youtu.be/yQph-_imtDY
2.3k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

850 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

351

u/USAFWRX Sep 02 '18

Out of the loop, what happened?

848

u/sonofseriousinjury Sep 02 '18 edited Sep 02 '18

An old gameplay trailer showed a puddle on the floor. A new trailer showed the puddle was smaller. Some people said Insomniac was downgrading the game just like Watch Dogs and want their heads on spikes.

EDIT: Even if they had to make graphical concessions in order to improve performance/gameplay I think it's funny how many people are vehemently upset by this.

523

u/And_You_Like_It_Too Sep 02 '18 edited Sep 03 '18

Supposedly, the original argument wasn’t actually about the puddles — it’s about the (alleged) removal of real-time reflections. Meaning, when Spiderman swings by or runs along a building with reflective/mirrored glass, it will show the reflection of everything except him. They were saying that no character models (including Spiderman) have a reflection in glass windows, puddles, etc. anymore, and that puddle was reduced to minimize how obvious it was that none of the character models were reflecting in the puddle (after that scene previously showed off the reflections in an earlier trailer). People don’t care about puddles, they care about basic reflections. Again, I’m not saying they’re right in saying or believing that, but to not give it that context is as silly as believing that they’re outraged about the removal or reduction of a solitary puddle.

Do I personally care about the controversy? No. Preordered and anxious to play it. Just figured I’d try to clear up the misinformation a little.

—————

Clarifications:

  1. Several people below have pointed out images, gifs, and videos that demonstrate puddle reflections. I don’t know exactly “when” the game was supposedly downgraded, puddles changed, or reflections removed... so it’s hard to know if the images and gifs in comments are from before or after that time. But what matters now is that it definitely appears that they’re in game, so all you puddle-gaters out there, this should put it to rest (I hope). Look through the comments below and be your own judge.
  2. I should have chosen a more recent gif of Spiderman running on a glass building without a reflection; I wasn’t expecting this comment to be so huge. Some have claimed that this gif proves that there were never glass reflections of Spiderman on buildings. Others have claimed that there are minimal reflections (I’m not sure how recent this gif is, or what source it came from). In the August 16th “Just the Facts” video, at 0:39, 1:08, and 1:59 there don’t appear to be obvious reflections, but this could be due to the time of day, the orientation of the sun, which compass direction Spiderman was facing on that building’s surface, etc.
  3. I never intended to be the mouthpiece of this controversy. My intention was just to point out that it was the reflections (or lack thereof), and not the puddles, that people were originally discussing. Then articles, threads, and videos began discussing the puddle outrage without that context. I personally think “puddle-gate” is stupid. I think complaining about reflections is stupid. I think this entire thread is why CD Projekt Red was hesitant to show us “Cyberpunk 2077” gameplay, because it will be analyzed to death and people will be outraged over any graphical changes or alleged downgrades, no matter how minor.
  4. I apologize if I misled, misinformed, or misspoke in any way. I’d have chosen my words more carefully or not commented at all, had I known it would blow up like this.
  5. “Spiderman” looks amazing. That’s what we SHOULD be talking about.

175

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

Well that's ridiculous. Reflections are a very taxing system in a game. It's not like mirrors. They have to recreate the full section, with NPC's and mirror their movement in real time. It effectively doubles the resources of the scene or environment. It's not something that's going to be in most games, because it's not something better technology can really fix. The better the graphics, it's still double the resources, and most games run using a fine tooth comb to split the hairs.

44

u/Kingrcf3 Sep 02 '18

This is why part of nvidias next gen graphics cards are so expensive is that they can do the real time ray tracing allowing better reflections among many other things the tech is getting there it’s just still not reasonable

3

u/AlanPauly Sep 02 '18

100% true. But i do hope the next PS gen can make it with a built-in VGA that is capable of real time ray tracing

15

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

Not without the PS5 costing 800+

3

u/AlanPauly Sep 02 '18

I would like to pay 800+ for the Pro version of PS5 only

4

u/rpgmind Sep 02 '18

I would like to toss you into a lake for your statements. And then help you out, and maybe lunch and a movie later?

-28

u/squat251 squat251 Sep 02 '18

so expensive? they're the same price the 1000 series launched at. New gen hardware is always expensive, they just managed to package that new feature in the same price box.

16

u/nikktheconqueerer Sep 02 '18

They aren't the same MSRP at all. You can google to confirm this.

15

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

1

u/Kingrcf3 Sep 02 '18

Actually 2080ti is shaping up to be $1200

-1

u/Kealle89 Sep 02 '18

Gotta adjust some of that for inflation tho. I know it’s small but still.

115

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

69

u/DudeLongcouch subsy Sep 02 '18 edited Sep 02 '18

This is you not understanding how game development works. When a game is in progress, developers throw every affect they can at it to make it as beautiful as they can. They aim for the ideal. Then, when the game is content finished and being scaled for performance, they remove things until they can hit the performance they need; wherever that line is.

It's not a lie, it's a "this is how we hope the final game will look but it will probably change by necessity before we're done." It's a reality of development. Some people need to stop being such whiny, crybaby bitches about it. Don't base your opinion of a final release on a 6 month old trailer. There is no shortage of footage of any given game for you to look at during launch and see what the final product is.

Hey downvoters, try to refute a single thing I said. Try to have an argument instead of just butthurt downvoting and moving on. You can't, because you're being ignorant, whiny morons and you're wrong. When people talk about gamers being gigantic manbabies, this is what they're talking about.

9

u/WindiWindi Sep 02 '18

And people wonder why cyberpunk 2077 was shown behind closed doors and wasn't released publicly if it were not from the overwhelmingly positive reception. I feel so bad that anything they do is combed over with a fine tooth comb it's ridiculous because you aren't going to sit there and just stare at half this stuff. People need to stop with this crap and temper their expectations. It's honestly pretty embarrassing making huge deals around what people really want which is optimizing the game so it can actually run. It happened with God of War and if anyone says that that is an ugly game they're crazy. Sure it doesn't look as nice but that didn't stop it from being one of the best selling games ever for Playstation. Because guess what it's not just about eye candy. The motion capture and performances from the actors. The art direction story and music. So many things AND PEOPLE came together to make it happen and you want to focus on some trees and a deer looking a bit worse when you shove your camera like 2 inches from it? Get over it. Look at all the garbage that is on steam. It takes more than some nice assets to make a good game.

32

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

It's kinda like why every single thing thats shown before a game comes out includes a tag saying this is alpha footage and subject to change. It's also pretty funny that people seem to think they went through the trouble of adding real time reflections only for a trailer so they could remove them later on, like it was some diabolical plot to waste a lot of dev time on something no one noticed

11

u/a0me a0me-ps Sep 02 '18

I agree with what you said but we know that the majority of pre-release footage for AAA titles is captured using purpose built vertical slice builds of the game running on hardware that’s more powerful than retail units. It’s just part of game marketing, and it does “waste” a lot of dev time.
The real question is why are so many people still basing their purchase decision on what amount to little more than cleverly crafted ads.

6

u/Eddyoshi Eddyoshi4 Sep 02 '18

Um...you do know that alot of trailers shown at E3 are made specifically just for that E3 even and not representative of the final game. Like Portal 2, and Scalebound, and FF7 Remake, and God of War?

1

u/blacklightnings Sep 02 '18

I think that was also a point of contention. Because if you watch the 2017 trailer it doesn't state that this is an early build or alpha of the sort. Regardless people really shouldn't be losing their shit about something like this.

1

u/melancious Sep 02 '18

Please take my upvote. I'm so tired of internet drama.

13

u/Trelga Sep 02 '18

Might as well quit looking at gaming subs then, I basically have. Gamers look for any little thing to complain about. This is not false advertising. Anyone who has ever played video games knows games don't look exactly like gameplay trailers. Gameplay trailers are perfect replicas of the game. Really the gaming culture is just getting ridiculous.

-1

u/agamemnon2 Sep 02 '18

And yet, here you are.

4

u/Trelga Sep 02 '18

And yet I said I basically had... not that I had completely

1

u/blackfootsteps Sep 02 '18

Then, when the game is content finished and being scaled for performance, they remove things until they can hit the performance they need; wherever that line is.

That must really hurt for those devs who have slaved away working on those systems / effects. Imagine being the people who've worked on the reflections for months, and then it gets scrapped.

I wonder if they keep that stuff somewhere for the next gen version (if applicable).

1

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

they remove things until they can hit the performance they need

I think what you said it's true, but when they finish the ideal. The next step is optimizing the code, assets, etc. If that doesn't work then they remove things until they can hit the performance they need.

-7

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

When a game is in progress, developers throw every affect they can at it to make it as beautiful as they can. They aim for the ideal. Then, when the game is content finished and being scaled for performance, they remove things until they can hit the performance they need; wherever that line is.

It's not a lie, it's a "this is how we hope the final game will look but it will probably change by necessity before we're done."

Well, which is it? If the companies know the games won't look like the trailers (they do), isn't that just tricking people into buying a product? Do the companies not have a responsibility to try to accurately represent the product they're selling in their advertisements for that product?

You can't, because you're being ignorant, whiny morons and you're wrong

It's probably that you come off as an unlikable cunt with your head up your ass and I'm the only person that hates themself enough to argue with you.

74

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

What makes you think they didn't plan for them to be in the final game and they had to be removed? Nothing, it's pure conjecture.

23

u/AmericanXAlpha American-X-Alpha Sep 02 '18

You went from saying the reflections were too taxing to be in the game to saying they could still be in the game. What's your point, man? Are they gonna be in the game or not? You can't write them off then turn around and reserve a bit of hope for them to be there. You've gotta make up your mind.

17

u/admiralvic Admiralvic Sep 02 '18

You went from saying the reflections were too taxing to be in the game to saying they could still be in the game.

I don't really see what is so confusing about the statement.

The whole argument is that they're taxing and were removed for whatever reason. Ganguro Girls then mentioned it shouldn't be in the trailer, a fair point, to which RJLyons noted nothing suggests the plan was to deceive people and it could've been the plan until it wasn't. Like, maybe the sidewalk could only have 15 people with reflections but they could hit 30 without them and decided 30 looked better than 15 with reflections and it changed.

25

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

They're not going to be in the game, hut that doesn't mean they didn't plan on putting them in the game. They probably reached a point where they had to get rid of them for something more important to work.

-31

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

You literally just wrote about how having reflections is too taxing, and now you are saying that they were going to put them in? I don't care about this so called controversy at all but at least stay consistent

7

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Tothemoonalices Sep 02 '18

they TRIED to put them in, and FAILED to do so, likely because of the power it takes to do them

Source? Or is this conjecture too?

→ More replies (0)

6

u/Pretentious_Fella Sep 02 '18

What he wants to say is: Insomniac had plans to put in the reflections in the game. However, probably during their testing, they found out that the reflections are so taxing on the system that it negatively affects the gameplay. So they decided to remove them altogether.

Not really hard to comprehend.

2

u/zadeyboy Sep 02 '18

Pretty sure hes saying that them being taxing is the reason they stopped working on them/took them out once they started needing the power elsewhere. Hes not really being inconsistent.

1

u/aBstraCt1xz Sep 02 '18

I feel like you need to learn how to read. Or understand how English works.

-13

u/obadetona obadetona Sep 02 '18

What difference does it make? It’s still a downgrade

1

u/jellysmacks Sep 02 '18

What? Are you delusional? He never said they could still be in the game. He’s saying the ORIGINAL plan could have been to have them in the game but near the end of development they had to be removed, due to how stressful it was on the system.

0

u/rpgmind Sep 02 '18

Now look I’m not your man, buddy

-2

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

1

u/DudeLongcouch subsy Sep 02 '18

This is also conjecture. You have nothing to base that statement on.

-3

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

9

u/Gadafro Sep 02 '18

There isn't really a workable solution to major realtime reflections. The reason why they're so taxing on the hardware is because it effectively requires a game to rendered twice over. This is true for any major realtime reflections, which is also the reason we pretty much never see them in a final game. Every so often we might find a game where there is some reflection done in a bathroom mirror (such as Uncharted 4), but that's really the extent of it, especially on a console.

I remember a while back, someone on this sub put up a screenshot of Aloy's eyes claiming that they were utilising realtime reflections on the iris, but it was quickly debunked as a generic snapshot layered over them in order to add a sense of realism - there was no way it would be a realtime reflection.

1

u/McCHitman McCHitman Sep 02 '18

Just break every bathroom mirror. Problem solved.

3

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

-3

u/DudeLongcouch subsy Sep 02 '18

This is also conjecture. You have nothing to base that statement on.

-7

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

If they had it in E3 coverage, planned for it to be in the game, and it had to be removed, that's a downgrade.

14

u/mr_antman85 Sep 02 '18

How is it a downgrade if removing them makes the game run better? This is just splitting hairs. If they were in the game and it ran like shit, they would get bashed anyways...so if through multiple play testing they figured that real time reflections made the game run worse, how is removing them a "downgraded"? The game runs better without them, so wouldn't that be an upgrade? 🤔🤔🤔 Or making the best logical choice for your game?

4

u/ilovefuckingpenguins Sep 02 '18

Upgrade in performance but downgrade in graphics. In most cases, people are talking about graphics when they say downgrade

Anyway this whole controversy is pointless. The game still looks amazing and I'm not gonna worry about some graphical changes when I actually get my hands on a copy

-1

u/mr_antman85 Sep 02 '18

The reflections are tied to the graphics...sooooo...how is this not about performance?

0

u/HeavyCustomz Sep 02 '18

Agreed, but people are either childish or just won't see reason. We all know that over time the scope of a project changes and things will get cut, due to bugs/performance/other issues. That's why what we see longfg before release is not final and it says so before every preview. Games are not movies, things will change, people just got to accept it. Or perhaps all devs should do like Nintendo and use graphics that makes the Ps3 look modern in comparison..

3

u/mr_antman85 Sep 02 '18

I just want to say that this is probably theost logical comment I've seen here. Over the course of a game being worked on, this will change (and usually it's for the better of the game). The bug problem is that none of these people worked on the game so they have no idea why decisions were made and that is what people are failing to realize. They just cry, "Downgrade..." and they don't even think, "I wonder what went on behind the scenes that they had to remove this?" Games aren't easy to develop and I bet if people were on the other side, they will be able to see that these decisions are easy to make, but trying to ask a gamer to be objective is an impossible task

3

u/Trelga Sep 02 '18

People want all this stuff in a game and don't realize that a project like this is made at first as an overshot of what can more than likely being reasonable done... that's the creative side of game design. If every game had to have perfect representation years out from release all games would look and play like complete shit because no company could try to make the best game they could. They would settle for what they already know is possible.

​

I'm calling it now ghosts of tsunami(sp?) will not look as amazing as it did at e3 this year and everyone will once again run to the internet crying.

1

u/mr_antman85 Sep 02 '18

Just wait until RDR2, Anthem, Cyberpunk 2077 comes out, people are going go crazy when these games don't look anything like they did when they were first shown. This stuff is only going to get worse unfortunately.

→ More replies (0)

-3

u/xStaabOnMyKnobx xStaabOnMyKnobx Sep 02 '18

Because the graphics are downgraded from their previous state. Sure the frames can improve but quality has inarguably decreased.

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

It’s not like the PS4 is the highest piece of computing hardware out there...

-1

u/xStaabOnMyKnobx xStaabOnMyKnobx Sep 02 '18

It isn't, I believe a thing called a gaming pc would take that title

0

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

That’s exactly what I meant...

→ More replies (0)

-9

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

6

u/mr_antman85 Sep 02 '18

That is literally false advertising.

I disagree there. When did they state that every window would reflect Spiderman and the enemies?

If you're displaying gameplay to get people to buy a game, it has to be an accurate representation of the game.

The swinging, combat, movement, taking pictures with citizens, stopping bugler's have all been represented. The problem is E3 in general and people not understanding what it's for. So was all of the magazine covers from 90s false advertising? Those games looked nothing like what we got. Again, it's our expectations and no matter what developers do they can't reach what we want.

Otherwise, people have a right to be upset.

I disagree there. The people who are complaining never once worked on the game. They don't know what happened, what decisions were made and why they were made. Yet you can post two side by side pictures and boom...you scream downgrade without knowing what went on behind the scenes. You're upset because why? Even if they did have logical reasoning behind what they did, you still wouldn't be satisfied, so again you're just mad to be mad.

They likely already knew consoles couldn't handle the reflections, but put them on because they knew it looked cool.

If you knew game development you would know that adding something just because it's "cool" doesn't add anything to the game. As games are iterated on, some things work and some things don't. That is game design. People are stupidly ignoring that.

They removed them just now because it's too late for people to be seriously deterred from buying the game.

Not really, I'm going buy the game regardless and so will many others. You're either going to buy a game or not, period. I know what games I'm going to buy and reflections won't change that.

All devs are doing this.

Again, this goes back to the problem with E3. E3 wasn't public for a reason, these demos are shown as proof of concept that all the mechanics, systems will work in the perfect environment. That's why if you see an E3 demo and play it in the final game, it's doesn't play out the same way.

Anyways, at the end of the day, gamers just want something to complain about. If the reflections were there, we would find someone to complain about, that what gamers do.

2

u/blackfootsteps Sep 02 '18

That is literally false advertising.

I disagree there. When did they state that every window would reflect Spiderman and the enemies?

Why does false advertising require a statement? Surely an inaccurate depiction is enough.

Regardless, as you said, anyone who has ever followed videogames knows that these kind of 'bullshots' have occurred forever. It's best to take early footage with a grain of salt.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

I wanted to play spiderman because of the reflections dammit

0

u/Sw3Et Sw3Et_07 Sep 02 '18

That is literally false advertising.

The game is still not out and the latest trailers, right as the marketing is in full tilt, shows the game/reflections accurately. Put down your pitchfork.

-5

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

Would you say Aliens: Colonial Marines was never downgraded then?

-3

u/b-i-g-b-o-s-s Sep 02 '18

You have no idea what you're talking about.

2

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

You can't downgrade something you don't have. The game was still in beta and things changed, that's how development works genius.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

1

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

I've been making games for 6 years now, want to try this again?

→ More replies (0)

-5

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

Because it's not possible on potatoes

3

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

Buddy if your insecure about how other people enjoy themselves you need to see somebody

1

u/Sw3Et Sw3Et_07 Sep 02 '18

Not gonna be possible on PC either lol

-1

u/Liberty_Call Sep 02 '18

The fact that pretty much no game has ever lived up to its E3 trailers.

1

u/McCHitman McCHitman Sep 02 '18

And it’s stupid stuff like this that makes CDPR plaster not final build all over a video lol. People are out of control

1

u/ginsunuva Sep 02 '18

They didn't know it would not be in the final game. There was a chance it could have if it ran well enough at the end

1

u/Willeth Sep 02 '18

This is absolutely not false advertising, and even if it was, is the argument 'now that I know this game has changed, I won't buy it'? That's not false advertising, that's someone making a purchase decision.

-10

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

Thank you. it's deceptive at best to market a game like that. Seeing the comments defend bullshit practices like this is terrible. But hey, get those pre orders in, it's Spiderman!

-14

u/nikktheconqueerer Sep 02 '18

It's because it's Playstation. People would be freaking out if it was EA or Ubisoft

6

u/merkwerk Sep 02 '18 edited Sep 02 '18

Or a lot of us are just functioning adults? It's not like the game came out and then looked completely different from all pre-release footage. They showed us gameplay of exactly what the final game looks like well before it's out. Where exactly is the deceptive marketing?

Shit like this is why the new Cyberpunk trailer has the giant "DOES NOT REPRESENT FINAL LOOK OF THE GAME" disclaimer on it. The same thing happened with Witcher 3, it doesn't look exactly like it's initial reveal trailers and many things were downgraded during development, yet it's hailed as the second coming of video games.

3

u/pjb1999 Sep 02 '18

At this point I really don't understand how people just don't assume that what they see in reveal trailers will not be an exact representation of the final game. I mean, to me these trailers are what the developer is hoping to achieve or how they envision their game. Usually they still face a lot of development time and things will naturally change/be downgraded as more and more gets added to the game.

-1

u/Okichah Sep 02 '18

Its impossible to know what a game will be like when its months from release.

You dont want honesty, you want time travel.

-5

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

2

u/DontUDareTouchMe Sep 02 '18

Jesus, you're a fucking mouth breathing idiot.

0

u/DudeLongcouch subsy Sep 02 '18

You... you realize that even console games are developed on PCs, right...?

0

u/xStaabOnMyKnobx xStaabOnMyKnobx Sep 02 '18

Maybe stop playing video games? I'm just as cynical about business as you and I'm still drowning in a back catalog between steam and game emulators.

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

This. People acting like it's not a big deal when false advertisement is a big deal. I've seen so many come to the poor, homeless devs defense on this as if I owe them money. No, they're selling me a product and I don't like being lied to. Do I want to play the game? Absolutely. But my pre-order is on hold just in case a bunch of other crap is missing or the game runs like crap.

-11

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18 edited Sep 02 '18

Further, it's something Sony has been extremely guilty of in the past, like E3 2006, where basically every single PS3 preview was totally faked, except Nioh. (Which released ten years later on substantially more powerful hardware.

If Sony's E3 presentation fudged reflections on a game (and one that already looked fantastic and by no means needed any deception), what else did they fake at E3 this year? I'm not so concerned about the reflections as the animation downgrade.

-6

u/OrionThe0122nd Sep 02 '18 edited Sep 07 '18

I just wish that we didn't have game devs limiting their games because it can only be on one platform. I'm hesitant to get this new Spiderman game because I've noticed that not a lot of the newer PS4 exclusives are running super great all the time on the slim that I have. If I could buy this game on PC I would pre-order it in a heartbeat because I know I can change it to run well on PC. Can't do that on PS4 and it's getting a bit annoying.

Edit: Just saw that Europe has a special Spider-Man/PS4 slim combo going on.

4

u/Secretmapper Sep 02 '18

Well that's ridiculous. Reflections are a very taxing system in a game. It's not like mirrors.

Actually mirrors are taxing on a game as well. In fact in most games mirrors are actually what you described - they recreate the full section and mirror the movement (i.e. Portal and many others).

6

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

I meant mirrors in real life, they don't reflect like in real life

9

u/raise_the_sails Sep 02 '18

IRL mirrors are taxing as fuck for me personally

-4

u/Shoopaloogie Sep 02 '18

Ya they do. You dont animate reflections, you tell a surface to reflect and it can. Its taxing, but you make it sound like they have to create the reflection separately and they dont.

8

u/And_You_Like_It_Too Sep 02 '18

I don’t doubt their complexity, and I’m sure the reason they removed them from their launch target was to create smoother, more fluid gameplay. And people will care more about what it feels like to swing from building to building than they will to see their unique Spiderman suit reflected on the glass windows of the buildings as he runs against them or any character movement in any body of water that has a reflective surface.

  • Unfortunately, because it was removed the people that are upset about it have a legitimate point that there was a visual downgrade... but it’s extremely minimal in terms of the overall look of the game (and say, the difference between trailer “Watch Dogs” and launch “Watch Dogs”). It’s the reason CD Projekt Red was hesitant to release the gameplay demo of “Cyberpunk 2077”.

Regardless, the entire conversation was derailed because people thought other people were up in arms about the movement or reduction in the size of a single puddle, and that story ran in articles which were then posted back to reddit where other people could talk about how ridiculous the first group of people were to be upset about a puddle in the first place. Again, it doesn’t bother me, and I’d be willing to wager that we might see those reflections return (perhaps to a lesser degree of fidelity) in a later patch, if it doesn’t majorly impact the game’s performance. But I’m firmly in the camp of wanting smooth gameplay over stunning reflections.

6

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

2

u/And_You_Like_It_Too Sep 03 '18

Hi, /u/I_Am_Gassy — I came across this post when it was brand new and the comment I replied to only had a couple upvotes. Never meant to be the voice of the controversy or represent one side or the other, so I definitely apologize if I’ve misled anyone in any way. My only intention was to clarify that people were actually upset about the supposed removal of reflections as demonstrated in the puddles and not the puddles themselves (which I did better in a lower reply). That allegation was obscured by articles and posts and threads claiming that people were outraged by the movement or diminishment of a single puddle, which of course is ridiculous. I was not, and have never been, part of the group of people complaining about any graphical changes or supposed downgrades, I was just attempting to highlight what the actual complaint involved... and had I any idea that my comment would be upvoted or viewed more than 500 times, I would have either been far more careful in my wording and selection of the gif, or just not made the comment at all.

—————

I’d be happy to edit my post, but I do recommend for anyone reading this to thoroughly read all the replies to it as well. It exemplifies the controversy in that people are claiming things were different either before or after a certain point, but no one is really saying when that point was. And to prove it, they’re sharing gifs and images without that context, so it makes it hard to tell if it’s part of the “before” or “after” group without serious analysis. My inbox is filled with images showing puddles with and without reflections, and even windows with and without reflections.

I had seen a gif of Spiderman running across a glass building in a comment replied to another post about “puddlegate” and it turns out then when you try to search for images about Spiderman and any reflections, windows, or puddles... there’s a lot of stuff out there. After a couple minutes of searching, I chose the gif I did because I was trying to show what it looks like when Spiderman runs along a reflective glass building. As some have pointed out, because it was from an alpha build, it proves there were never any building reflections. One commenter provided this gif to demonstrate that there is a subtle reflection, although I’m not sure how old it is or from what video. And then, in the August 16th “Just the Facts” video, you can see at 0:39, 1:08, and 1:59 that there don’t appear to be reflections. Maybe they’re there, maybe they’re not. Maybe it’s due to the time of day, or the location of the sun, or what side of the building Spiderman was on... who knows.

—————

As for reflections in the puddles, that same video contains the image that you shared that definitely looks like a puddle reflection to me. Other people have claimed that people were seeing shadows rather than reflections. Or that it’s actually an issue with cube maps, or ray tracing, or image/video compression, or time of day, or that I’m a deliberate and blatant liar, a karma whore, intentionally spreading misinformation, a dumbass for pre-ordering, an asshole for not responding (because I went to bed after my comments), and a variety of other fun things. I just want to point out that I think the game looks fantastic, that the controversy is silly, and that I’m excited to play the game. Thank you for being polite about it.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

If you ask me, that’s the real story.

Not the reflection changes but the jackasses who are derailing he conversation. I.e. the usual suspects games media. The way they act push me away from games I would otherwise be interested in.

-9

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

-3

u/And_You_Like_It_Too Sep 02 '18 edited Sep 03 '18

I know when I first bought “The Division”, I spent a good long while marveling at the reflections in tiny puddles in the street, with neon signs, blinkers and sirens from cars, ambient light, and the sun overhead all factored in.

I thought it was really impressive and one of the first truly “next-gen” games I’d bought on the console. Whenever I was waiting for someone to buy/sell/clear inventory or whatever, I’d spend some time just looking at puddles and shooting the outline of dicks into vans to see how long bullet damage stayed before disappearing, etc. It’s mostly just stuff that adds to the realism and you really don’t notice it unless you’re specifically looking at it (or know it’s not there).

It’s nothing that would make me buy or not buy a game, or be outraged over... but it’s like the store displays that aren’t just static images, and have Christmas trees and presents or mannequins or whatever inside that you could actually shoot... or people in upstairs apartments leaning over and watching people go by, or actual indoor space that you can enter and not just streets, or lights that will turn on in office complexes across the way... all of it is pretty cool, and makes me recognize how far we’ve come in thirty years. I’m excited to see what games will look like in another 30.

3

u/PraiseTheSun1997 Sep 02 '18

You're representing the liars that's for sure. There was never any real-time reflections

2

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

1

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

Well not easier, so to speak, they're designed with raytracing enhancements, so you're paying a premium for GPUs designed to do that hefty work. In a few years they'll improve and come down in price, but it's unlikely the next gen of consoles will have something like that.

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

They make them better. They're harder to produce, they just look better.

3

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

nah its easier too (but not necessarily easy). but still expensive. raytracing's biggest benefit is easy reflections and having that at the hardware level is an amazing convenience I didn't think we'd get for another 5 years.

1

u/TheAfroNinja1 Sep 02 '18

Its not easier to to RT, it looks better but your games are going to run worse with rtx on than off.

4

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

In terms of developing the reflections, RT is dead simple compared to the current techniques. Hardest decision (outside of the obvious "how many rays do you want to sample with") is how "true" you want your reflections to be; I. E. If you want to render stuff in a reflection that isn't in the camera, you need a way to store that info, since normal GPU pipelines discard those triangles before lighting comes into play. So, easier but not easy since this step above isn't trivial (I believe).

But yes, this still does take time to do and will obviously impact performance. Having a dedicated core for this helps, but there's always costs associated with using and moving around info obtained from the GPU.

1

u/slash9492 Sep 02 '18

Aka:Raytracing

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

Reflections are a very taxing system in a game. It's not like mirrors.

Umm, it literally is like a mirror, lol. if you're reflecting something not in camera space you run into the exact same problem you described. because the GPU discards any triangles it doesn't need to render for the player.

the only thing that makes a puddle harder is the post processing effect to make it look puddly after getting the reflection rendered.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

Well then they probably shouldn’t have included high quality real time reflections in their announcement trailer.

-2

u/Radulno Sep 02 '18

Well if they showed it and it's no more there, it's the definition of downgrade. Not that it matters because development evolves and graphics change but I understand some people might have a problem with it.

-9

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[deleted]

4

u/culturedrobot Sep 02 '18 edited Sep 02 '18

If Coke's original plan was to sell a 12 ounce can, then they said before release that 12 ounces were too ambitious and they had to go with 11.8 ounces, then yes, that's acceptable.

The only people who should feel burned by this are the people who pre-ordered the game, and honestly, they get what they deserve for giving their money to a developer for a product that doesn't exist yet. Stop pre-ordering video games and suddenly reflections in puddles aren't a problem.

Edit: Clean up

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 02 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/FJLyons Sep 02 '18

go play your "custom made alienware computer" cat.