NOT IN GAME FOOTAGE

Why do they still have to do these type of trailers for games?. Think it be better to show of the game it self instead of film like trailer what don't show game at all.

Indeed, I loathe CGI trailers.

"In-engine" footage is the new thing.

I think this is more annoying to be honest, because in-engine is showing you what is technically capable on a PC, but then it's slaughtered to work on a console.

Don't mind CGI trailers if it's at an intro or used wisely (e.g. Homeworld)

Dude..... Those Assassin's Creed Cinematic Trailers are 1000% better than what you experience in the games themselves. When I see a new Assassin's Creed being announced I am happy not because of the game but because of another awesome cinematic trailer.

Here's a few:

I just don't watch those videos. There's no point to watch a trailer for a game that don't show the game.

This^^

I don't mind intros or even CGI announcement trailers at all. What really annoy me are vertical slices shown as "gameplay footage". And in the end the game looks nothing like that. At least with CGI trailers, they don't mislead you.

As long as they are clear on what CG trailers are, and don't attempt to mislead people, I don't see the problem.

Thank you Sony!

aha. star citizen is by far the worst with their never ending stream of "commercials" which idiot hermits still think is real time footage of how the game will look.

Exactly, honestly i don't mind them as a way to tell the overall story, the ideas they are implementing and even to create some hype, the problem comes if they try to pass it as true gameplay (ejem...Killzone 2).

@nyadc: That's not always true even SW:BF looks surprisingly close to its "in engine footage". So do most the exclusives.

Nah, Star Citizen is not a Sony product and it doesn't even do commercials. The game is available for anyone who pledges unlike lolSony trailers. Try again!

Already looks better in-game right now (Alpha 2.0) than what was shown in commercials back in 2014. And BTW they haven't released any commercial for 1.5 years. So, at least don't lie.

Yeah, I agree that "in-engine" gameplay trailers are much more annoying because they capitalize from sales off of false advertisement.

In my opinion - cinematic trailers are good when there's an interesting story behind them, and not just action scenes that don't explain anything about the game.

this trailer disapointed me, i was thinking the game would never look as good as this, it failed my spectations

I've enjoyed some CGI trailers a ton like the Deus Ex ones. So yeah keep em coming

@leandrro: too bad the actual game is not at that level. post processing, LOD, animation, shadows, shading have all taken a hit.

@Cloud_imperium: no it doesnt look better than any of the commercials, and there was a commercial less than a year ago. every time they want to sell a few more 500$ ships to suckers they release more offline rendered footage that you clowns believe is realtime.

cinematic trailers are ok, if they've already showed off gameplay. It pisses me off when they show CGI movies to announce games. Plus the money making them could've gone towards making the game better..

Why?

Cause they can't make the game look like that, but it's still cool to look at.

never ending stream of commercials? the last one i recall is the topgear one which was a year ago.

You are aware that people are currently PLAYING star citizen alpha right? we already know what the game looks like

Do you really think in-game footage will generate hype and anticipation to the general public? there a reason why they still keep doing it. it works.

It works for the companies, people hype the hell out of cgi trailers, looks at UC4.

Sony games run on the whole not in game footage thing for years to build hype. Then they release all fugly.

Lol, whatever makes you sleep at night. The game already looks better. I doubt that you even know that Alpha 2.0 came out 2-3 days ago. Everything that they showed in trailers in possible in the gameplay, including explosions and system damage of ships that you guys were saying is just a "tech demo". And it's kinda funny that you are mentioning Star Citizen while you damage control over Uncharted 4 at the same time... Never forget this.

@Cloud_imperium said:

@m3dude1 said:

@Cloud_imperium: no it doesnt look better than any of the commercials, and there was a commercial less than a year ago. every time they want to sell a few more 500$ ships to suckers they release more offline rendered footage that you clowns believe is realtime.

Lol, whatever makes you sleep at night. The game already looks better. I doubt that you even know that Alpha 2.0 came out 2-3 days ago. Everything that they showed in trailers in possible in the gameplay, including explosions and system damage of ships that you guys were saying is just a "tech demo". And it's kinda funny that you are mentioning Star Citizen while you damage control over Uncharted 4 at the same time... Never forget this.

ive seen the alpha 2.0, and its not at all on the same visual level as the offline rendered commercials.

Whatever floats your boat man.

@Cloud_imperium: LOL k. link to the alpha 2.0 footage that "looks better" than this plz.

Constellation used in this trailer is already outdated. It's redesigned from scratch using better techniques and Alpha 2.0 uses new Constellation. So, yes that's already an improvement. On other hand, we haven't visited the same planet shown in this trailer, so there is no direct comparison of it yet.

@Cloud_imperium: im talking about overall visual fidelity. none of the alpha 2.0 media ive seen matches it.

@m3dude1:

Overall visual fidelity is better. If you can't see that then that's your problem. There are some things, that still need improvement, like characters for example, that are still being worked on, but rest of the environments are a lot more detailed.

Hell even damage states and explosions are much better than what was shown in Hornet and Drake Interstellar commercials. In those commercials, fake explosions were placed on top of objects instead of actual system based explosions that are in the game now that not only look better but are also a lot more closer to reality.

Everything looks spiky in old trailers compared to new ships models and environments. Just look at Space visuals and ship shown in the commercial you posted.

Now compare it with the environments currently playable in the game. And these visuals looked nothing like that last year. Everything is upgraded with big patches, they are still releasing them and not only adding more content but upgrading visuals and optimizing the game at the same time.

They're promotional.

These trailers are for the general public.

I like them quite a bit personally, I think they can be really cool artistically. They don't show much about the actual gameplay of course, but I treat them in the same vein as a teaser trailer, as cool pieces of content about a product that I'm interested in, not necessarily a good example of some of the finer details of the game.

@Cloud_imperium said:

@m3dude1:

@m3dude1 said:

@Cloud_imperium: im talking about overall visual fidelity. none of the alpha 2.0 media ive seen matches it.

Overall visual fidelity is better. If you can't see that then that's your problem. There are some things, that still need improvement, like characters for example, that are still being worked on, but rest of the environments are a lot more detailed.

Hell even damage states and explosions are much better than what was shown in Hornet and Drake Interstellar commercials. In those commercials, fake explosions were placed on top of objects instead of actual system based explosions that are in the game now that not only look better but are also a lot more closer to reality.

Everything looks spiky in old trailers compared to new ships models and environments. Just look at Space visuals and ship shown in the commercial you posted.

Now compare it with the environments currently playable in the game. And these visuals looked nothing like that last year. Everything is upgraded with big patches, they are still releasing them and not only adding more content but upgrading visuals and optimizing the game at the same time.

the commercials look cgi-ish, the alpha 2.0 looks like a game. theres a huge difference in the shading and post processing quality.

@m3dude1: On one hand you are looking at compressed video with scripted camera movements, on other hand you are looking at uncompressed high res screenshots taken during actual gameplay that showcase better visual quality. But seems like you don't even WANT to accept that.

@Cloud_imperium: You post pictures of UC4 yet the E3 footage matched that.

Hahahaha

I think early builds that over promise on visual fidelity are the worst. See early witcher 3 and watch dogs.

To show the game and to avoid confusion, or at least they're trying. Maybe even go as far to say trying to avoid legal issues.

@Cloud_imperium: laugh all you want drakes model matches that.

@AM-Gamer: lol of course the model matched, would be hilarious if the model turned black akinned lmao

Lol what?

@AM-Gamer: you said model, noob

@AM-Gamer

The game still looks stunning. Don't get me wrong... It's really impressive at times but it doesn't match E3 quality. But then again, it'll be wiser to directly compare two scenes when the game is out.

So Star Citizen is not officially vaporware yet?

@napo_sp: The character model you dumbass. It's not rocket science.

@Cloud_imperium: The guy from Gearnuke did a comparison. I'll try to post the link when I get the chance but they showed the improvement they made from the PSX demo. Increased polys on the hair and improved texturing on the model. The game looks quite a bit better then the PSX demo and I think it's because they gave up on 60fps.