AMD announces Division 2 partnership

Incredible new experiences. I remember Division 1 tech demos with great lighting, shadows, physics.
Then game came out and it looked dull, you could shoot bus stop made of glass all day, and no broken glass... All the downgrades which made it look like 2001's Game.

I hope that Division 2 with all those new experiences will deliver at least that what Division 1 promised. Otherwise no buy for me again.

Edit: I take it back, you could break glass in HL1. And do lot more in Red Faction.

 

Well the game looked amazing on my PC when it released not as good as the tech demo they showed at E3 2013 but very good, so maybe dont play on consol or low end gamer rig..??

 

I never played it. Because I do not buy games which show signs of severe degradation. So, how was glass destruction? How was dynamic damage to environment like cars? How did you like local temperature effect of flames on frozen roads and snow?
Because after launch, all maxed out videos proved it to be pretty low end engine.

So I can tell, it is not my non-existent "consol" nor my "low end gamer rig", but sheer difference in our definition of "amazing".

 

Well damage to cars were better than in most games, it was never meant to have super destructable items like BF or other games.
Snow was very nicely made and foot prints etc. worked again better than most games i have seen. when you crouch near a car and push the door snow will fall of etc.
Glass destruction worked fine but standing still just shooting one piece of glass to prove a point means very little to the overall experience.

Overall i have very little to complain about, have i seen better looking games YES, was it as good looking as the E3 trailer Hell no. But the overall GFX of the games were some of the better i have seen.

 

So game breaking.... game is pretty enjoyable when you focus on the gameplay and restrain yourself from shooting busstop windows all day long.

 

Was just one example. Baked in reflections. You look into window and there is reflection from completelly different environment than you are standing in. And apparently not your own reflection. And in places where they baked in correct background, they did change objects afterwards. So, you have car, garbage can, lights hanging, ... which are magically not reflected.
Reflections in game are like mirrors to alternative universe.
There were and still are many videos doing comparison of promised features. And they are full of "NO" and "X" as game have seen severe downgrade even on effects which could have been done in real time.
It would not hurt them to keep Ultra settings there which would enable those promised features.

Yes, wrong reflections are as game breaking as missing shadows.

 

To you maybe.

When you're fighting a horde of lvl 34 Elite LMB soldiers while trying to extract your loot, you don't give a rat's ass about reflections. Just saying.

 

Imagine playing CS:GO without shadows. It is information. Absence of information takes away your ability to make decision based on that information.

And when there is missing reflection, it creates subconscious confusion. Imagine yourself walking on wet street, and you see reflections of everything, except people.

It is better to have no reflections and simulate dry environment than let your brain process such failure.

 

Your sure that the engine can drag it with our graphic cards at descent framerates in multiplayer? The engine itself is from 2012?

Game still looks pretty good even with them misses, heck Watchdogs did too (I did mod it for the better looks though), Ubisoft should rather think about not showing of stuff that they won't implement in the end product.

As for shadows, I rather miss some or have them with less details than not having a fluid gameplay.

 

Damage on cars was toned down, yeah that was a very shitty.move, but it still worked somewhat.

Melting ice and sun/fire interaction with it worked, but not so obvious like in that tech demo.


Reflections seemed ok, not so detailed bit they worked. Enough to thr point they weren't distracting.

Shadows are also very detailed, even at high.. my gpu can't handle nv specific hfsl or a little lighter pcss..

Shame really, but overall it's still looking good.

 

You must struggle to play a lot of games then, if not most... since most games have some form of degradation to them. its quite hard to these days to find many games that don't specially in the Triple A scene...

The game had its own issues as do all games, it wasn't a bad one it just lacked something and some enemies were too bullet spongy for my liking, but very few games have what you are after even in recent years, half the time its due to the insane amount of cpu power would be needed to run an engine that can do everything you want.

 

The Division is a great game, it's fun as hell to jump into again every few months. So gorgeous, so smooth...

 

It is still irrelevant when fighting lvl 34 Elites etc.
(decision making in that moment isn't based on visual information obtained from shadows or reflections or the lack of either)

I see your point though, but personally can never relate to people who call things like not having breaking glass or inaccurate reflections as gameplay breaking.

Especially if they haven't even played the game in question.

But to each their own.

PS: you can disable reflections completely in Division's graphics settings

 

They call it immersion. And if game behaves in way it breaks atmosphere, then it is wrong. Division looks like game seen through eyes of person with hallucinations. Yet it is not meant to be such kind of game.

"Especially if they haven't even played the game in question." Do not ever use this as argument because it is stupid.
It is same as: "Don't judge me and my actions, my motivations. Especially if you haven't even killed anyone."
Or: "Don't judge our cannibalistic religion. Especially if you are not member. You can't simply understand."

I play games which look like something pulled out of ZX Spectrum. They are just fine for what they present themselves to be.
I have seen quite a few Division videos because I followed it from 1st announcement till launch, and then time to time. (Just in case it became acceptable.) I'd say 8+ hours of them. If I went to friend's place and played for an hour, I would not learn anything new from immersion perspective. And that's what I am critic about here. (And apparent broken promises.)

 

lol

WTF this guy.

The Division looks amazing in all aspects, the light is superb, weather, fire, environment.... Please dont comment if you dont know anything Jon Snow

 

No wonder these two partnered:

- Buggysoft : Expert on the fine art of false advertisement (CGI run on uber PC) and massive downgrade on release.As know "PC lover", the downgrade on PC is ON PURPOSE.(Watch Dogs "optimized PC version graphics" and dev comments in code...)

- AMD GPU: Expert on marketing stunts like useless blind monitor tests to hide real GPU performance and funny slides like the 2 polaris=1 1080.

Expect the worst from The Division 2: impressive graphic downgrade and performance deception.

 

guys, idk why youre even trying to debate fox here all he said was that he doesnt want ubisoft to show a flashy dramatic trailer with advanced technical effects in order to build hype, then strip away every single effect that made their video footage so impressive in the first place - which they certainly did in the division. guess wat? they did it for rainbow six siege as well...they absolutely kneecapped the lighting, shadow system, & even replaced fortification models with simple & visually unimpressive versions that were completely different.

is siege a bad looking game? not at all! is it disingenuous to sell the atmosphere of a game & then purposely alter it on release? yes, it is. its frustrating & quite frankly stupid to encourage the practice by tacit acceptance - its akin to doctoring screenshots, but worse...& acting dismissive about it will only serve to further encourage publishers to do it in the future.

i was interested in the division & had friends who played it a fair bit. the buggy launch, visual downgrades, & meandering endgame was offputting, so i never bought it. the devs put a lot of work into the game since then, & it has improved in its gameplay & stability quite a bit, i hear. like fox, i too am interested in buying the division 2...but only if ubisoft learned their lesson from the first one. otherwise, ill pass as well.

more on-topic, it is good to hear support for RPM & other team red specific optimizations. we will have to wait until launch to learn the extent of their effectiveness, but im keeping tabs on their techniques out of interest...hope they release specific details later. i enjoy reading white papers

 

You have 2 posts here. 1st is in Witcher 3 thread where graphics looked very promising and game proved to look better upon release:

And this, where you consider downgraded graphics "amazing", "superb". Good Job!

 

I played beta and free weekends, only to see how they improved it. I really don't wonder anymore, how such ambitious game could loose 90% of the player base in few months. And it's fascinating how people easily forget how Ubisoft lied about microtransactions in Division, even if "it's just cosmetics!". So yeah, go reward such constantly liyng publisher with your money, lol.