finally someone said it

the game looks like absolute shit

you're just brown I'm afraid

>thank god someone validated my cynical, contrarian opinion
must be fun being you. gread thread btw. will you kill yourself when it wins goty?

Ok don't play it then

>>717661959 (OP)
>It's HIDEOUS
That's what the doctor said when you were born

Oh my god, is this that insufferable 12 year-old who spams AI responses in these shit threads?

>>717662243
I think the AI spammer gave up after his mother found the OpenAI API bills

Expedition 33 has immaculate art direction, but the presentation of said artwork is an ugly, blurry, poorly-optimized mess.

>>717661959 (OP)
The reason it looks like absolute dogshit is because it's a double A -game which is also reflected in its prize.
Because they had to work on a small budget, they elected to use UE5 and get most of their assets from the UE5 asset store. Yes this means the game doesn't have a cohesive artstyle and on top of that has all the visual shortcoming of UE5, but it's cheaper to make so it's worth it.

The thing that infuriates me is that reviewers don't know fuck about tech or the way that games are made, so they don't mention those shortcomings in their reviews.

ue5 bad now gib me money

>>717662574
It's sad that because of him being a grifter allows people to ignore the things he's actually right about.

Absolute midwit move on his part to start grifting so early.

>>717662513
>The thing that infuriates me is that reviewers don't know fuck about tech
this, they just repeat talking points and pretend like it's a revolution

>>717661959 (OP)
>game has missing a few missing shadows and some flickering if you look at a random wall in the intro level as Sophie
Mexican christianio ronaldo twink knock-off did not bring his best.

>>717662702
>game has a few missing shadows**

>>717661959 (OP)
it looks like something from ~10 years ago on UE4 with all the blur and bloom
and obviously they had to cut corners to make it run well - its playable on old gpus, which is respectable

>>717661959 (OP)
Works on my GTX 1060 machine :P

>>717661959 (OP)
Fantastic art style, music, everything, absolute dogshit actual visuals because ue5 is cancer. Look at hair, shadows, foliage, pop-in, and worst of all, REFLECTIONS. Especially the Manor. It's beyond disgusting-looking. All the while having extremely meh performance for the very basic visuals it offers from a technology standpoint. I'm on a 7900XTX that's undervolted and run at 3k core, 2700 mem and the performance is still piss-poor compared to the presentation. Games that look far better came out over 10 years ago. Once again, in terms of asset quality, not art style.
If the art style and environment design weren't so nice it'd be just a footnote.

Watch his video.
All his graphical issues are on the Prologue level, which is easily Expedition 33's weakest part graphically.
In other words, it's very possible he never actually played the game.

>>717663008
But I have, and his issues are just the surface of how bad the game actually looks. Leaving aside how models can look plastic in many cases, the assets and effects themselves are of extremely poor quality usually. Look at distance shadows, look at the godawful, disgusting blur, look at how Maelle's hair stands out against a background of snow (for example, the high-level one near Monoco's station with the Danseuse teacher), look at how revolting reflections look in any puddle and ESPECIALLY in the Manor which is such an important part of the game. They literally MOVE, ghost and blur if you pan the camera even slightly. It's atrocious. Look at how badly the environments blend in places, for example in the areas under the Monolith in many cases. Look at how jagged and aliased distance objects and ESPECIALLY hair look even at native render res. Look at how awful the ue5 ghosting is if you don't use one of those retarded ue5 clarity mods. Look at that godawful post-processing, the sharpening and the CA especially.
The game has graphics worse than basically anything you can think of since... what, 2011? And all of the issues are because of fucking UE5.
The art style and the colour variety is phenomenal to me, but from a purely technical standpoint it's just terrible.
Doesn't make it a bad game, but it would have been a better game had it used a real engine.

E33 really deserves a remake on a competent engine, and by people who know what they're doing.

>>717663008
What you're saying makes no sense. The game doesn't suddenly change its graphics or alter its rendering later in the game. It's still being rendered the same.

>>717663323
>Look at distance shadows, look at the godawful, disgusting blur,
Yea, he went over that. It's the biggest nothingburger ever. Graphicsfags don't actually play video games. They just hunt for slight imperfections and pretend they're the worst thing ever.

>>717662702
game has garbage dithering artifacts on everything from
textures, to hair, to "soft shadows" that aren't even fucking soft because they have no fucking transparency.

>>717663491
Makes sense to me. I honestly believe the Prologue wasn't even meant to be playable. It's mostly just a cinematic jumping point. So it makes sense that its playable portions are the least polished in the game.

>>717663618
Post them then. Because he certainly doesn't care enough to post anything past the prologue.

>>717661959 (OP)
am I the only one seeing this?

>>717663638
>the one part of the game everyone will definitely see is supposed to be low quality
e33 shills everyone

>>717661959 (OP)
Even now retarded fanboys are defending awful visuals.
If it had decent performance I could understand all the low quality effects but it struggles to run without using upscaling.

the only bad part of the game technically is the hair dithering effect (which is present in every UE5 game). That and the odd ghosting that happens in cutscenes when the background is blurred. I hope their next game ditches UE5 and rather go for a proprietary engine or something better.

>>717663828
You don't play video games.

I don't think this game is getting praise because of how it looks. People like it because it's the only turn based strategy outside of persona and final fantasy that gets people hard.

>>717663864
I guarantee I play more than you. You're probably one of those retards that hopped on because their school laptop they bought for 1k could run skyrim.

stay mad

>>717662473
Wait is he actually talking about E33? I never heard anyone say that E33 is optimized or super polished. Their art direction, music, writing, voice acting and gameplay are 10/10 however.

>>717663638
>Makes sense to me.
No it doesn't make sense. A game doesn't change its rendering depending on where you are in the campaign, that's ridiculous. It's like going on a hike and saying the laws of physics were completely different before you entered the woods and after you entered it.

I'm trans btw

>>717661959 (OP)
>somebody said it
Weren't they always saying it? It's not a good performing game.

>>717663491
Why do you think it would not make sense? Just like with any other thing, devs get better at what they do the longer they work on the game. The prologue is likely the first thing they worked on. Which means by the time they get accustomed to the tools and get good at using them you move on to the later parts of the game.
Same with RTS games, you can generally see which maps were early and which ones later on in their dev cycle, not only the complexity of the maps, even the art, the lighting, the use of assets, everything can change.

>>717663849
The shadow issues are definitely something I've noticed before.
Since the game is a huge success, I also hope they move away from third world engine like the UE5, and still keep their team small.

>having to make a fake boogeyman post and account that don't exist to "prove a point"
kek

>>717663734
even at ridiculous scaling resolutions that melt your GPU (and with custom mods to turn off garbage like the sharpening) the game still looks like grainy pixelated fucking garbage and glicthy dithered shadows.

>>717664007
Levels of a game can certainly look noticeably different based on how much time the developers had to polish those parts.
Stop pretending to not understand my point.

>>717664171
When I turned this game for the first time I was thinking my GPU had a stroke.
But then I realized it just looks like shit no matter the settings I use, mods help a little but character rendering is just unacceptable.

>>717664171
Never saw that in my game.
Zoom out so I can see the entire screenshot. I need to see how dishonestly you're trying to recreate that effect.

>>717663517
The game objectively look and runs like dogshit from a technology standpoint. You don't need to be a graphicsfag to notice the vomit-inducing way reflections on basically any surface in the Manor move or how bad the hair dithers or how blurry and ghosty the image is, or how badly jagged anything in the distance is. That, or how awful shadows look since most of the game is super brightly lit and you are almost always seeing them.
What part of "the game is great, but it looks like dogshit" is hard for you to understand? I already said that the art style and environments are its saving grace. They could have achieved all of this with a competent, sensible engine that wasn't built around around temporal ghosting, "muh lumen" and "muh upscaling".

>>717663812
Yes because nobody surfing this site in 2025 knows the algebra cabin man anymore. It's nothing but zoomer trash now. Yet they can name you 20 mumble rappers and eVape flavours.

>>717664346
Stop repeating this tired script. I don't care about your perceptions. One man's "vomit-inducing reflections" is just a missing reflection for another person. Just put the screenshots in the bag and shut yo mouth.

>>717664129
>>717664209
Because the rendering of a game does not shift depending on where you are. That's now how games work. Games don't dynamically say "in this level I will use 16 temporal samples for the antialiasing, in the next level I will use 4 because why not??" it doesn't work like that. Games stick to the same graphical rendering mode consistently unless you change it through the graphics menu, why the fuck would a game give you the option to modify the graphics and expect consistency if it's just going to change the graphics rendering of its own accord? Listen to yourselves.
A game can shift its artstyle but it cannot change its graphics unless you change them in the settings.

>>717664294
>Never saw that in my game.
yes you did. you don't have a different game than the rest of us retard.

>Zoom out.
the image is not zoomed in retard. it's cropped. the pixel resolution is at 1x1 and focuses on the face. if I post the full screen i will need to post a lossy jpeg and it will be scaled down by 4chan, diverting focus from what I want to show you. that's your intention isn't it? just to try and shift focus away form the games garbage rendering and you think ""zooming out"" will "fix" it.

I got news for you, the games garbage rendering doesn't stop being garbage just because you move you low IQ ass further from your tv screen until you can't see any details.

>>717664592
The fuck are you talking about, "missing reflection"? Have YOU ever actually played the game? You cannot go in the Manor's main room without every single surface's afterimage moving along with your screen. This is objective truth, this is not preference or perception, anyone can go in-game right now and see exactly this.
You not caring doesn't fucking change the way things objectively are. What kind of redditoid 4th grader bullshit is this?
This is the game at its absolute max details, and the image still looks fucking awful if you zoom in even a bit. There is blur on the edges, there is awful aliasing on the hair, the ground textures are xbox 360-era, yet it can't keep a steady 60 fps in this area.
When you play the game one day, you'll see what people are talking about.

>still trying to convince people who had fun playing the game that they didn't have fun and people who thought the game was beautiful that the game was ugly
I hope you're at least getting paid and not wasting your time.

>>717664823
>frappe virtuose
more like fappe virtuose lol

could not believe my eyes on a 5070 Ti, unreal needs to be stopped

>>717664592
the mansion has horrible artifacts that fuck the pixels around your character as you move the camera. don't you dare pretend that that's how reflections are meant to be programed. the game is taped together from UE5 glitchy sub-functional systems.

>>717665003
more like frappé délicieux xD

>>717664823
Glad you’re posting screenshots so everyone can see how much of a drama queen you’re being. That is certainly not “vomit inducing”. In fact, nearly everything you said about that screenshot is either inaccurate or just an exaggeration.

>>717664607
>Because the rendering of a game does not shift depending on where you are.
Not all of it, but yes, settings on models do change. You get better at making the models themselves, you get better at setting lighting paremeters, and lighting changes in every single map/area, you also get better at making textures, you get better at making shadow maps.
So yea, while there are settings that might apply globally troughout the whole game, I can assure you that the quality of assets and how they are utilized will 100% change throughout the dev cycle.

>talk about shitty UE5 dithering, TAA blur, ghosting
>there's always a faggot with 1/10 eyes who goes "I don't see that in my game"
I have friends like that. People with shitty eyes or that don't notice small details see no problems with games like that, that's literally the reason so many devs don't give a shit about it either, most normies see no problem with it.

>>717665341
It's wilful ignorance. Or blindness. Because they like the game, therefore it cannot have any flaws.

>>717665341
Yup. Normalfags often don't even notice they run their games with 60Hz V-sync on their high refresh displays.
They simply use default settings and play their games. I wish I could do that but my autism won't let me.

>>717665496
It's not autism, it's just standards that comes with the technical experience from playing many video games, there's absolutely no reason to be ashamed of it, and that's not something you can fight anyway.

>>717661959 (OP)
I know a fair bit about rendering pipelines and there is a forest for the trees problem with him. While specific things he says are often true, pro game devs would love to spend months or years optimizing small render pipeline stuff with their games just like he talks about, but the bigger kind of 'optimization' is man-hours to finish the game and make a profit. All of the 'lazy dev' techniques he is angrily ranting about are labor-saving devices to get games looking good enough to ship on time and on budget. There is something to be said about institutional knowledge loss that comes from mass adoption of Nanite, but the point of it is not that its better, but that its good enough to take 1/10th the labor time.

>>717661959 (OP)
I tend to agree with Threat Interactive on most of his analyses. It's only screeching UE devs proud of their hideous messes that get their panties in a bunch.

Yep
When this game got like 20 fucking active threads in here at all times I was pointing how shitty it looked and everyone shat on me for it.
The game is decent but the graphics are just not. We're not talking about something developed by two people to pull any bullshit here. It runs terribly as well and already needed performance mods at launch. You can have all these funny particles on screen and it'll still look kinda like dogshit. In fact sometimes the lighting reminds me of those cheap fan remake projects on youtube for old classic games (you know the ones, the "nintendo hire this man" ones).

>>717663989
You weren't around, simple as that.

I will not play this reddit game. buy an ad

Is the E33 fanbase getting as obnoxious as Cyberpunk's?

>>717661959 (OP)
just dropped in real quick to say gustave is best boy

>>717665925
That's pretty much what I'm always saying. UE5 allowed sandfall to create a decent looking game despite a small team and a relatively short development. Yes the shortcuts used to make the game look "next-gen" introduce a lot of issues but without it the game would still look like pic related

>>717666148
Any fanbase is the same.

>>717661959 (OP)
watched his video and while a lot of it is correct (E33 is a game with pretty artstyle and presentation held back by weak rendering), a lot of is also disingenuous
>[x] is the worst thing ever, you can see this by observing a scenario in which a scene was built around [x] looks bad if you turn [x] off
>[y] is better (doesn't actually show [y] in action or prove why it would be better, conveniently omits mentioning why it wouldn't work)
>even though [z] fixes nearly every issue with [x], [z] doesn't count because (arbitrary reasons that have 0 relevance in practice)

>>717666260
this meme about small team is so funny, literally go look at the credits, there is more than 300 people, mostly gooks and poos

>E33 has great artstyle and art direction!
What the fuck are these people smoking lol, it's the most generic shit imaginable, which was probably a necessity since they had to not make a billion store bought assets clash with each other.

>>717666545
name other games that nail the same look

>>717664420
what? there was literally a ted kaczynski show at the top of netflix like a month ago

>>717666043
there's that and the game just betrays itself in general. it expects me to take it as seriously as it does itself, and it does this in the very first fucking scene of all things, when it hasn't even been given a chance to get me to give a shit about anything yet. it's probably just eurofags being the weird faggots they are

>>717666475
Whenever people call Expedition 33 an 'indie game' that is a very loose definition. Since they worked on a midway triple A budget. That's not the same thing as a 3-6 person team game or something who work on the shoestring kind of funding.

now that the astroturfing campaign is over we can admit this game wasn't very good.

>>717666820
I just remembered I played the stellar blade demo recently and as run of the mill that game's story and gameplay is, it at least starts off with everyone getting fucked up in a planetary assault right off the bat which easily sells itself. in ex33 the opening scene is long dramatic dialogues with long dramatic pauses with characters we don't even know or give a single dick shitting fuck about. fucking devs

>>717662663
>they just repeat talking points and pretend like it's a revolution
Same thing happened with all the bitching about games using UE5 when they don't know shit about game development or how game engines work or why certain ones are more popular.
>>717662825
>ue5 is cancer
My point exactly

>>717665925
Is it really 10 times the effort to used baked lighting and proper LoDs?

>>717667326
Yes. Even TI knows that hence why he advocates for developing an advanced AI generated LOD system because creating good LOD for a whole game is mind numbing.

>>717667404
But you aren't doing all the LoDs and mip-maps by hand.

>>717666643
Gimme 500 dollars to buy some UE store assets and I'll make you one.

>>717661959 (OP)
TI is a retard.