Support NeoGAF

[Sept Terrion Of Nothing]

God of War has tons of cutscenes, they are doing exactly the same tricks AS EVERY OTHER 3D GAME. No excuses for ugly characters in CUTSCENES.

In gameplay you can blame lack of RT and I will agree with that.

Sif had two adult sons and a daughter, she is also 40 plus:

Both of them are of course hundreds of years old and both of them look good (Sif is hot).

Sif looks more Deborah than "Laufey", lol.

 

[Mozza]

Are you suggesting they uglified them in the past? No man, even today if you were to do what people are doing in the thread it would be the same.

You can take screenshots of games today like this:

and repeatedly say in threads "omg it's gollum, it's gollum, look at what Julia Pratt really looks like"

People don't do that though because they don't have any preconceived opinions or hate for "Japanese devs".

You need to try much harder lol..

 

[Guilty_AI]

Plus, what does this have anything to do with the OP? Dude gets all fixated on cutscenes that he thinks he's in a Digital Foundry or tech analysis thread.

He was originally trying to argue Grace only looked better because she was on a cutscene, and GoW was somehow unable to pull the same lighting or camera tricks to create an equally good looking character on the screen due to the no-cut characteristic they adopted.

 

[DeepEnigma]

He was originally trying to argue Grace only looked better because she was on a cutscene and GoW was somehow unable to pull the same lighting or camera tricks to create an equally good looking character on the screen.

 

[AMC124c41]

 

[Three]

They are doing all the same things as other studios are doing, see Guilty_AI post.

When you have fixed camera magic can happen, no matter if they cut to black or not, they can load all kinds of stuff in the background.

I've seen his post and replied to it but you know that already. it doesn't address the point. "Magic" can happen off camera but nothing is really happening in them other than some model out of shot not being important/visible in what he's showing.

On a single shot due to the scene you're filming you can't have different models load, you can't have lights suddenly appear between shots. You dont see that happening. it will determine how that camera needs to move too which is the worse thing you can do to make things even more difficult and constrain camera movement every time you want to load something different. So they use a single model for both gameplay and cinematic for creative freedom. They keep any changes minimal to on the fly changes that aren't jarring, that means they have lighting that isn't always perfect. Its much more difficult to set a scene without cuts. This is true in the physical world and it's true for games.
I can't place one light on somebodys face then as the camera pans to another person move that light slowly to the other guys face, that would be visible as a moving light. In a cut I can move the light freely between cuts in an instant and make the character look pretty as if I were setting up studio lighting or a red carpet flashlight photoshoot for each single scene. It wouldn't matter. It's more difficult to do for a single shot but I'm not sure why you're denying this claiming its "exactly the same". He asked can you show me the developers saying it was difficult, when I posted exactly that he completely ignored it too and just kept claiming it's the same.

 

[DeepEnigma]

 

[Three]

He was originally trying to argue Grace only looked better because she was on a cutscene, and GoW was somehow unable to pull the same lighting or camera tricks to create an equally good looking character on the screen due to the no-cut characteristic they adopted.

That's not what I was claiming. I was originally claiming that you can post poor looking images of Grace and claim it has been "uglified" and I showed this with an example of an ingame shot of her. It was pretty apt.
Somebody then said look at these cutscene images. I then said GoW uses a single camera and they use a model that doesn't change between cutscene and cinematic because they use a single take camera shot for GoWs since 2018. I said that they have an inbetween model that looks better than RE9 gameplay but lower quality than cutscene RE9 and it is a nightmare for asset management and scene setup to do a single take camera. Especially as a sudden jump in quality would look jarring. You then tried to say but they can use tricks. I then said tricks that would make it even more difficult and even determine cinematics to look downright stupid. Imagine having to always look away from the character to load another better model.

 

[Guilty_AI]

On a single shot due to the scene you're filming you can't have different models load

Neither game uses different models for cutscenes, as i've already mentioned from the start.

, you can't have lights suddenly appear between shots. You dont see that happening.

You can, i've even posted a timestamped video showing exactly that happening

He asked can you show me the developers saying it was difficult, when I posted exactly that he completely ignored it too and just kept claiming it's the same.

Never asked that

I then said GoW uses a single camera and they use a model that doesn't change between cutscene and cinematic because they use a single take camera shot for GoWs since 2018. I said that they have an inbetween model that looks better than RE9 gameplay but lower quality than cutscene RE9 and it is a nightmare for asset management and scene setup to do a single take camera.

To which i responded:

Being a single cut doesn't impede it from doing tricks like that, especially with some smart camera movement and positioning.

Also, RE R uses the same model for gameplay and cutscenes.

I then said tricks that would make it even more difficult and even determine cinematics to look downright stupid. Imagine having to always look away from the character to load another better model.

I was refering to the part where you talked about detailed rooms or how "They can change pretty much everything". But i see you missed the part where i pointed out both games use the same model for gameplay and cutscenes, which makes your whole argument is null.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

He was originally trying to argue Grace only looked better because she was on a cutscene, and GoW was somehow unable to pull the same lighting or camera tricks to create an equally good looking character on the screen due to the no-cut characteristic they adopted.

Holy non sequitur.

 

[Three]

Neither game uses different models for cutscenes, as i've already mentioned from the start.

Are you trying to tell me these two models are the same?

You can, i've even posted a timestamped video showing exactly that happening

I don't see that happening in your video. You might be able to get away with it with something going completely off screen. But you can't set a scene like that with a single light and it panning between the two unless you show empty space inbetween.

Never asked that

You're right it was TintoConCasera . My mistake:

I was refering to the part where you talked about detailed rooms or how "They can change pretty much everything". But i see you missed the part where i pointed out both games use the same model for gameplay and cutscenes, which makes your whole argument is null.

They absolutely do change models between entire scenes, cutscenes and gameplay. So the detailed rooms where they can change everything is true.

The Mad Draklor that's not what I was originally saying at all though so...

 

[KanKamAndNob]

Why does every female have to be attractive? Lead or otherwise. Nobody owes you are anyone that. Ill never understand this. Are you looking for eye candy-fan service or a good game?

Also, attractive is purely subjective. Is Kratos attractive? Thor? Tyr? Brok? Get over it and look at other corners of the internet to get off.

 

[Guilty_AI]

Are you trying to tell me these two models are the same?

Lighting is the main difference. Or did you forget the uglo "hypotetically low quality" model has no issue with ray/path tracing on?

There's also distance from the camera to take into consideration, a close up will obviously show more details than when the face is further away with the same screen resolution.

I don't see that happening in your video. You might be able to get away with it with something going completely off screen. But you can't set a scene like that with a single light and it panning between the two unless you show empty space inbetween.

uh, i don't know how you think light in games work, but you don't need an actual brighty dot of light in a game to create luminescence. You can 100% put a light between characters - or even two directional ones on each's faces for enhanced cinematics - without having a tinker bell sparkling between the two

 

[adamsapple]

God of Fabulous

 

[Bojji]

Lighting is the main difference. Or did you forget the uglo "hypotetically low quality" model has no issue with ray/path tracing on?

There's also distance from the camera to take into consideration, a close up will obviously show more details than when the face is further away with the same screen resolution.



uh, i don't know how you think light in games work, but you don't need an actual brighty dot of light in a game to create luminescence. You can 100% put a light between characters - or even two directional ones on each's faces for enhanced cinematics - without having a tinker bell sparkling between the two

We can argue that advanced RT/PT is like "cutscene lighting" being applied to games in real time.

Games like Death Stranding look current gen in cutscenes and cross gen in actual gameplay, they lack that lighting quality. But what they showed in that GOW trailer was mostly cutscenes, they could have made Lufey look MUCH better if the wanted. This is AAA team with full Sony backing, there are no technical excuses here, they just didn't want to do it this way.

 

[Zacfoldor]

 

[Guilty_AI]

We can argue that advanced RT/PT is like "cutscene lighting" being applied to games in real time.

Technically speaking, its just simulation of real light. You can still mess up lighting direction even with realistic lighting

 

[Bojji]

Technically speaking, its just simulation of real light. You can still mess up lighting direction even with realistic lighting

And I think Capcom still does that in cutscenes of Pragmata and RE9, they can't make that that much different than "artistic vision" raster version (that most people will play).

 

[Fbh]

All that is just poor excuses. You don't care about Kratos being ugly as fuck and not having any resemblance to the actors playing him, just because in his case you don't feel the need to fantasize about fucking him. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I don't give a crap if the character looks like their mocap and/or voice performer. In fact I vastly prefer original character designs over face scanned actors, regardless if they are male or female.

Also yes, as a straight man I don't care too much about the sex appeal of male characters, however I still tend to prefer characters that look good, cool or badass.
Geralt in The Witcher 3 has by far my favorite design in the series, and you know what? yeah a part of it is that they made him more attractive (specially compared to TW1) even though I don't fantasize about fucking any version of him.

Kratos being "ugly as fuck" is debatable IMO, and even then it doesn't matter because his main appeal is that he looks cool and badass as fuck:

Female Characters can also go for the rule of cool BTW. One of the coolest designs in modern games (at least in my opinion) is a female character.

I would 1000% be excited to play as her if they made a Bloodborne spinoff with her as the main character.

 

[PlayStaytion]

To be honest, it has to be insecurity in their own appearance or their personality. And I think we're still seeing this in some of the larger AAA games because these studios have been working on these games since 2020 or 2021.

There's no way this game pulls the same amount of sales at a Kratos God of War.

This generation at least from Sony side invaded by women and most men evaded from Sony with no trace.

 

[NT80]

Is this out of proportion too?

lol

Actually defending this is dumb

Puppy!
This is extreme cherry picking. She just got burnt fighting that fire beast. Other than that She's got different hair colour and looks a bit weathered and haggard compared to real life so nothing really out of the ordinary considering her situation. I didn't know that she was in Ragnarok but looking at her there she looks more fresh faced as she's younger and living in peace.
Meet the cast video

 

[Guilty_AI]

And I think Capcom still does that in cutscenes of Pragmata and RE9, they can't make that that much different than "artistic vision" raster version (that most people will play).

AAA games actually have dedicated lighting directors.

If you ever wondered why some newer games using raster look worse than older ones with even less advanced tech, its because those put more attention in how scenes and characters looked rather than simply trying to replicate realistic lighting. The less dynamic elements actually make it easier to create more consistently good-looking scenes

Its why this:

can look more aesthetically pleasing than the rastered scene above

With modern lighting tech, you need to pay attention to way more stuff (and thus the need of a dedicated director)

 

[Three]

Lighting is the main difference. Or did you forget the uglo "hypotetically low quality" model has no issue with ray/path tracing on?

There's also distance from the camera to take into consideration, a close up will obviously show more details than when the face is further away with the same screen resolution.

This is path traced on more powerful hardware. The models are not the same between scenes even with this PT on. Not sure what else you want but no these are not the same model

uh, i don't know how you think light in games work, but you don't need an actual brighty dot of light in a game to create luminescence. You can 100% put a light between characters - or even two directional ones on each's faces for enhanced cinematics - without having a tinker bell sparkling between the two

You don't understand what I'm saying at all. In film the crew moves the lights along with the camera for every new angle. This ensures that the close-up shot is lit perfectly, rather than settling for an angle that casts unwanted shadows or doesn't highlight the actor's features properly. cinematographers adjust and alter the lights to maintain a good look on the screen, even if it goes against the real-world geometry of the room. They do this for every angle of any cut in the scene. When it's a single moving camera shot you can't really do this. It would look like this if you did:



Notice the jarring light jumps to get the character perfectly lit. You can't move this gradually to match the camera position because it would just look like a strange moving light. For a jumping camera (cutting from one cam to another) this is not a problem and you don't notice the light has moved. You won't notice anything unusual while keeping your characters perfectly lit and looking great when you can cut to another camera.

 

[Guilty_AI]

This is path traced on more powerful hardware. The models are not the same between scenes even with this PT on. Not sure what else you want but no these are not the same model

Enabling PT doesn't enable secret cutscene-quality models. Not sure what you're on about here.

And even if you try to argue that somehow they aren't the same model (they are), all you're doing is shifting the burden of the problem to the lighting, since the PT scene does look pleasing, lower quality model or not, unlike GoW faurey. Heck, scenes from the previous two GoW games look better.

You don't understand what I'm saying at all. In film the crew moves the lights along with the camera for every new angle. This ensures that the close-up shot is lit perfectly, rather than settling for an angle that casts unwanted shadows or doesn't highlight the actor's features properly. cinematographers adjust and alter the lights to maintain a good look on the screen, even if it goes against the real-world geometry of the room. They do this for every angle of any cut in the scene. When it's a single moving camera shot you can't really do this. It would look like this if you did:



Notice the jarring light jumps to get the character perfectly lit. You can't move this gradually to match the camera position because it would just look like a strange moving light. For a jumping camera (cutting from one cam to another) this is not a problem and you don't notice the light has moved. You won't notice anything unusual while keeping your characters perfectly lit and looking great when you can cut to another camera.

Its you who isn't understanding what i'm saying.

A game isn't a movie, neither does it take place in real life. If you must create luminescence out of thin air to illuminate a face or an object from whatever angle you want, you easily can without any side effect like the camera light reflection that appeared in the video. The white brightness on that scene isn't the literal source of the light, it's an specific visual effect added by the developers. A single click and that disappears while still maintaning the same lighting of the scene.

 

[GloveSlap]

Beating your female characters with the ugly stick is just an outward facing symptom. You see that and you can be reasonably sure of the sickness that lies within.

 

[Bojji]

Puppy!
This is extreme cherry picking. She just got burnt fighting that fire beast. Other than that She's got different hair colour and looks a bit weathered and haggard compared to real life so nothing really out of the ordinary considering her situation. I didn't know that she was in Ragnarok but looking at her there she looks more fresh faced as she's younger and living in peace.
Meet the cast video

She is already 300+ years ago by the time GOW2018 takes place.

Deborah still looks good in this video:

And this is Ragnarok model:

 

[Three]

Enabling PT doesn't enable secret cutscene-quality models. Not sure what you're on about here.

And even if you try to argue that somehow they aren't the same model (they are), all you're doing is shifting the burden of the problem to the lighting, since the PT scene does look pleasing, lower quality model or not, unlike GoW faurey. Heck, scenes from the previous two GoW games look better.

They're not, you can blatantly see they're not. Yes the PT scene does look pleasing but the engine in GoW doesn't have PT. The model is accurate though.

Its you who isn't understanding what i'm saying.

A game isn't a movie, neither does it take place in real life. If you must create luminescence out of thin air to illuminate a face or an object from whatever angle you want, you easily can without any side effect like the camera light reflection that appeared in the video. The white brightness on that scene isn't the literal source of the light, it's an specific visual effect added by the developers. A single click and that disappears while still maintaning the same lighting of the scene.

Did you even see the video of RE I posted of how it achieves perfectly lit characters in some cutscenes and how it wouldn't work if the camera moves around instead? How the lighting doesn't look right when moved. Do you not see how the shading on the face changes as the light moves based on camera position? Nobody is talking abou the bloom. You're just arguing for arguments sake.

 

[MacReady13]

Somehow, Sony seems to think that normal means ugly. Not every woman is as beautiful as a model, but not every woman is as ugly as these Sony females ffs.

 

[violence]

I think she just needs to be a cooler looking character to play as. She ain't there.

Remember the Hades fight in God of war 3? It felt very underwhelming after Poseidon. They never redesigned Hades and used the 'mid' design from his two second appearance in a God of war 2 cutscene.

 

[Guilty_AI]

They're not, you can blatantly see they're not. Yes the PT scene does look pleasing but the engine in GoW doesn't have PT. The model is accurate though.

I'm saying they're the same model based on what modders reported, and how changing in-game models affect cutscenes as well. If all you can do to counter that is post a couple of video screenshots, one of a extreme close-up of her face and the other a handful of on-screen pixels, drop it.

Did you even see the video of RE I posted of how it achieves perfectly lit characters in some cutscenes and how it wouldn't work if the camera moves around instead? How the lighting doesn't look right when moved. Do you not see how the shading on the face changes as the light moves based on camera position? You're just arguing for arguments sake.

How not? Swap the light to whatever you want on the second it takes to move the camera from one shot to the other, or just position the lights beforehand wherever you want.

Or rather, the scene on the video doesn't even have any cuts, it pans away from her face to her reflection. It inherently contradicts your point.

 

[JerryinSoCal]

I love how they use a heavily airbrushed photo of her for the real life photo lol.

 

[Bojji]

But you can't render humans properly!!!111

 

[Three]

I'm saying they're the same model based on what modders reported, and how changing in-game models affect cutscenes as well. If all you can do to counter that is post a couple of video screenshots, one of a extreme close-up of her face and the other a handful of on-screen pixels, drop it.

I'm not blind I can see it's not playing it on PS5.

How not? Swap the light to whatever you want on the second it takes to move the camera from one shot to the other, or just position the lights beforehand wherever you want.

Or rather, the scene on the video doesn't even have any cuts, it pans away from her face to her reflection. It inherently contradicts your point.

The second it takes? How would that work. Say you need to go from a shot of the face to a shot of the hand. If you pan you would see the single light move to the new postion as the shadows change while you're panning. Have a cut and you can move it between the cut without it looking odd.

 

[Kamina]

I'm not saying that they didn't mess up, but the actress is older now (41), paired with bad lighting in some scenes makes a big difference if you compare that with real photos of her mid 20s hotness.

 

[Guilty_AI]

The second it takes? How would that work. Say you need to go from a shot of the face to a shot of the hand. If you pan you would see the single light move to the new postion as the shadows change while you're panning. Have a cut and you can move it between the cut without it looking odd.

Why a single light? Just have two directional lights pre-positioned , exactly like in the video. If any interference happens, fade one out while fading the other in while moving the camera.

 

[Three]

Why a single light? Just have two directional lights pre-positioned , exactly like in the video. If any interference happens, fade one out while fading the other in while moving the camera.

Because it would be more difficult especially for it not to be noticeable. Same reason they don't really do it in cinema and do cuts. Do you atleast admit that it would be a lot more work vs being able to set everything just for that camera/cut with disregard for how it will look inbetween transitions from one shot to another?

 

[Guilty_AI]

Because it would be more difficult especially for it not to be noticeable. Same reason they don't really do it in cinema and do cuts.

No? Like i said, stop with the cinema comparison. This is a virtual 3D world where you are god, able to not only create light out of thin air but even pick the specific properties you want manifested into reality. A directional light that only propagates at 15 degree radius with no glare that only has a 1 meter reach? Only a few clicks, assuming their tooling isn't horrible at least.

Do you atleast admit that it would be a lot more work vs being able to set everything just for that camera/cut with disregard for how it will look inbetween transitions from one shot to another?

Its a lot of work either way.

 

[Three]

No? Like i said, stop with the cinema comparison. This is a virtual 3D world where you are god, able to not only create light out of thin air but even pick the specific properties you want manifested into reality. A directional light that only propagates at 15 degree radius with no glare that only has a 1 meter reach? Only a few clicks, assuming their tooling isn't horrible at least.

Nobody is talking about the ability to create lights. That doesn't help you. I was talking about fading lights in and out in a manner to not be visible and be realistic. The transitioning work that would be required for it. It doesn't matter if you buy lights or create them out of thin air.

Its a lot of work either way.

It's more, you know it, but you don't want to admit. You don't want to admit that it would require light transitioning work for every shot rather than have the lighting simply be good enough with some imperfections to the way the actor might look in that single scene/single cut environment.

 

[Guilty_AI]

I was talking about fading lights in and out in a manner to not be visible and realistic. The transitioning work that would be required for it. That doesn't matter if you buy lights or create them out of thin air.

Camera moves, light moving out of sight slowly fades out, barely noticeable, hand moves upwards or something as it slowly becomes more illuminated by the light fading in, even creates a cool effect out of it. I think MGSV did stuff like that.

It's more, you know it, but you don't want to admit. You don't want to admit that it would require light transitioning work for every shot rather than have the lighting simply be good enough with some imperfections to the way the actor might look in that imperfect lighting single scene/cut environment.

Now you're getting into the realm of minimal details of tweakings lights in a scene to look just right.

Having to do these adjustments for two separate shots, or working them together for a pan movement... it's safe to say you've longed moved past the point of "iTs impossibrU to duh it iin gOW!!1!!11!!!!"

 

[Three]

Camera moves, light moving out of sight slowly fades out, barely noticeable, hand moves upwards or something as it slowly becomes more illuminated by the light fading in, even creates a cool effect out of it. I think MGSV did stuff like that.

"Barely noticeable" that's the hard part. Well done you've described transitioning work. Compare that to the alternative, teleport camera and teleport light for new shot, done. No need to work on transitioning at all, but "totally the same amount of work bro" according to you.

Now you're getting into the realm of minimal details of tweakings lights in a scene to look just right.

Having to do these adjustments for two separate shots, or working them together for a pan movement... it's safe to say you've longed moved past the point of "iTs impossibrU to duh it iin gOW!!1!!11!!!!"

That's the realm we were already in plus any other asset changes you were suggesting too by panning out of shot, changing model, and then panning on the character again to not have jarring transitions in quality between shots. every time you wanted to show the character. Far easier to keep the same good single model, the same complete environment lighting and move the camera and character wherever the hell you like freely. Sure the way your character is lit would not always look good/perfect and someone might be able to freezeframe in a 1 second quick action shot and complain about how "ugos" someones is but that's not the same as changing a face scan to not match. Would you have even noticed the face he froze of when she was flying in the air with the sword until somebody tried to cherry pick that frozen frame and use it as ammo? "Barely noticable".

 

[Guilty_AI]

"Barely noticeable" that's the hard part. Well done you've described transitioning work. Compare that to the alternative, teleport camera and teleport light for new shot, done. No need to work on transitioning at all, but "totally the same amount of work bro" according to you.

Ah yes, choosing the correct position of the camera, making small adjustments, the technical work that goes into making sure the sudden transition doesn't cause weird millisecond artifacts (very particular problem to videogames, generally moving the camera is actually less problematic than sudden transitions, i remember ps5 release making lots of big deals about that), having to make sure the light transitions unnoticeably anyway since real time cutscenes aren't like cutting and splicing videotape together in a movie. No work at all, sure.

That's the realm we were already in plus any other asset changes you were suggesting too by panning out of shot, changing model, and then panning on the character again to not have jarring transitions in quality between shots. every time you wanted to show the character. Far easier to keep the same good single model, the same complete environment lighting and move the camera and character wherever the hell you like freely. Sure the way your character is lit would not always look good/perfect and someone might be able to freezeframe in a 1 second quick action shot and complain about how "ugos" someones is but that's not the same as changing a face scan to not match. Would you have even noticed the face he froze of when she was flying in the air with the sword until somebody tried to cherry pick that frozen frame and use it as ammo? "Barely noticable".

i think you're just crashing out at this point.

GoW Faurely looks bad, worse than previous GoW even, which had the same "limitations" you keep insisting on. Me and others aren't blind and can see that. But keep up the sony defense, who knows, Nishino may come to your room to shake your hand and personally deliver a prototype of their portable ps6 or something.

 

[Three]

Ah yes, choosing the correct position of the camera, making small adjustments, the technical work that goes into making sure the sudden transition doesn't cause weird millisecond artifacts (very particular problem to videogames, generally moving the camera is actually less problematic than sudden transitions, i remember ps5 release making lots of big deals about that), having to make sure the light transitions unnoticeably anyway since real time cutscenes aren't like cutting and splicing videotape together in a movie. No work at all, sure.

The "correct camera position" and "small adjustments" would apply to your final shot in both cases. Why wouldn't it? The only difference is that you don't have to worry about what happens inbetween the two shots. It's less work but you're making excuses for arguments sake.

Not every game/engine has culling/loading issues. Especially when showing the character/environment that's always loaded anyway in a linear game. I can't believe this is what you're going with.

i think you're just crashing out at this point.

GoW Faurely looks bad, worse than previous GoW even, which had the same "limitations" you keep insisting on. Me and others aren't blind and can see that. But keep up the sony defense, who knows, Nishino may come to your room to shake your hand and personally deliver a prototype of their portable ps6 or something.

Who's crashing out? Previous games the women weren't based on face scans, they don't really look like their actors much at all. Faye is with all her blemishes, and you have these comparison to draw from, but you can still find bad shots in them where the lighting doesn't look right, where they make a silly ugly face in combat, or the forehead looks big due to no hair self shadowing/lighting, etc. Just like RE9 gameplay or Faye now.

This is literally Faye from "a previous god of war"

What a beauty?

 

[RaySoft]

This is the actress

This is the character model in game

Why do they make women look uglier? Is this on purpose?

Comparisons

"Its just a bad angle"

The bad angle:

Gollum sequel

We all know why. It's about inclusivity. I'm 50 now. I've understood that our world will cycle itself anyways.. We are dinosaurs in this game. Let the children play together and sort it out amongst themselves. I can tell you this though.. Before any progress, we will always endure some backlash.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

Face scans are just excuses. If anything trying to say the actress was uglified is playing nice. Asia gaming expects perfection, and that means makeup-quality. If they use an actress they try to show the best version of that actress. Not the "real" version that even the actress herself doesn't use for her day to day. Most adult women refuse to get out of the house without basic makeup, if they didn't want to show their raw face to the world i don't understand why game companies want otherwise.

There are scientific reasons why things turn out this way in Western AAA gaming, but the main cause is when those involved start to make games bad deliberately because they wanted gaming destroyed. Because gaming makes men happy without having involving a woman. Thus gaming itself is a threat to women and needed to cease to exist at a fundamental level.
(It is confirmed that a married man being happy by himself, alone, is enough to make his wife angry. This is an instinct and something wives had to deliberately hold back if she want to stay married.)

Now that is of course the exact oppose to the goal of a company trying to SELL games. But since the people making games are now not the same as the people selling them, you are not going to notice the damage until the game is launched and the "game consultants" already got paid and left 2 years ago.

Asian gaming is not immune to this, but there is the counterforce that they know money doesn't grow on trees. Asians worry about how to make a living and make a good product that sell. And that pleasing customers still matter in Asia.

 

[Gitaroo]

I think GowL is missing the hero lightning that everyone is complaining if implemented

 

[MayauMiao]

Its weird how they are trying so hard to get realistic detail yet fumbles at the hairline. It looks like she was wearing a wig.

 

[German Shocks]

How did this thread become so legendary?

 

[Liopleurodon]

 

[Gonzito]

 

[pulicat]

Another one from the east team