ACIV and Bullshots
So as you may know from your video-gaming experience, promotional gameplay screens are often doctored or grabbed from a game running at impossibly high settings.
Some people, for this reason, call promo shots "bullshots".
When the ACIV screenshots were released, I naturally adjusted for the assumption that these were bullshots.
http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2013/03/Assassins-Creed-4-Black-Flag-sile...
http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2013/03/assflag.jpg
I was disappointed, as I assumed that if the game looked significantly worse than that as is often the case, it wouldn't be very much of an improvement over AC3, which I thought was a great step forward graphically.
But then I saw the gameplay trailer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6rwCyP1LLg
And... that pretty much looks like an animated bullshot. I was not expecting that. It actually looks BETTER than those screens.
I guess we might be entering an era where AAA game's screenshots won't be edited very much since games are looking OK by themselves.
I want to see what it looks like on a TV in front of me on next-gen consoles.
Was anyone else surprised by this?
to be completely honest... I will be shocked if most of that actually ends up gameplay footage and not cutscene footage... at best.
“Force has no place where there is need of skill." Herodotus
Are you saying you don't find it extremely easy to differentiate between what is cut-scene in that trailer and what is"theater mode" gameplay?
I'm not sure exactly what you're suggesting, but up-rezzing fight and open-world scenes to the level of cutscenes for one trailer is an enormous waste of resources, especially if the illusion will be dispelled a few months later at E3.
There's nothing wrong with being skeptical, but going off past Assassin's Creed marketing practices, something labelled "gameplay trailer" is a mix of cutscenes and undoctored gameplay, and that seems to be the case here.