The facial animations aren't just down to the game engine. The game engine uses the facial animations created by the animators. So if they create bad facial animations, it will look bad. The bad lip syncing is down to an automated tool in the game engine. But they do have tools to go in & manually adjust the animation.
I don't care about lip sinc if the writing is great, i will not even notice it, but when it's bad just like that Star war crap you notice it. The same with the graphics, RDR was not that good looking but you don't mind when animation look real and characters are great.
@@aniruddhadas1011 You know i play those games since 30 years so i'm fully aware of what those games looked like when i played them when they first released. But i just wanted to compare with actual games that have great graphics but horrific writing. So those old games with dated graphics are still globally looking better than a star wars Outlaws.
The thing is, man, is that the same studio that made SW Outlaws somehow did facial and performance animation WAY better in 2014 with AC Unity. Also, game engines are developed by software engineers. For the "bad lip sync thing," for a fully baked cutscenes like that it's only make sense to capture all of actor's performance rather than use only the body and just half the facial performance (because why would they use face Cam when its mainly use is to capture lip and eyes performance?)
I think it mostly comes down to how cinematic the RDR cutscene feels (camera positions), the blocking/business of the scene and the dialogue... the facial animations aren't THAT much different but you can tell that Outlaws just utilized an automated tool and said "done" while RDR has a lot more intention shown with their faces... the RDR scene feels more realistic and ALIVE
@@mrX666-s9pHave you even played the game? I have, there’s not a single forced inclusion in the whole game. The game itself is laughably bad, but there’s no DEI in it. Criticize it for what it is, a mediocre game.
@@turkeyman9914I believe they’re referring to the people who actually worked on it, and they’re probably correct. Looking at team photos from the people behind these projects is night and day compared to when games had actual talent behind them. Regular looking dudes whose most interesting quality is their talent, VS people who look like they’re supposed to be in a parade, and their most interesting quality is their pronouns. Whether you agree or not, you can’t deny there’s been a definitive shift in who you see working in the industry.
@@Brumsly Oh sure, but it’s not exclusive to the gaming industry. Still, companies are clearly noticing people are getting annoyed at their forced inclusions everywhere. Disney literally removed a trans character from one of their series because they know they’ll lose money because people can’t stand it.
@@turkeyman9914 Agreed, it’s certainly not exclusive to one industry. Yea, there’s been a lot of talk around the fact that companies are starting to get the message that regular people are fed up, but if it makes much of a difference remains to be seen. There’s a LOT of money in conforming to the wishes of Blackrock and ESG scores for the heads of these companies. “We’ve learned how to force behavior.” -Larry Fink
While I agree, that argument doesn’t hold up for a game they had had a decade to catch up in quality. It’s not like rdr1 is the most up to date rockstar game
Art style and framing seem to be forgotten in certain new games like outlaws. Companies seem to just want to strive for the best graphics and frame rates. A good art style can look timeless.
To be fair, people have demanded and thrown temper tantrums for years that every single new game has to look ultra realistic above everything else. Why else do you think the majority of popular games last generation were just ubisoft clones with shiny graphics and almost no diversity in gameplay or style. Obviously there were occasional outliers, but everybody voted with their wallets and said they want nothing but washed out color schemes with photo realistic graphics and extremely boring gameplay with recycled stories we watched in movies and shows a decade earlier.
In my opinion this demand for always better graphics and better everything is a problem that gaming business created themselves from the start. Always telling that this game has better graphics than competition and this hardware is more powerful than the others. Sure, it is easiest way to convince consumer that they should buy your product, but sooner or later you will hit the point in graphics that they stop will mattering so much, and art style and art direction becomes much more important when creating a good looking game. Also, many people confuse good art style with good graphics. It is not strictly about what amount of polygons or pixels you have , but how you use them.
Never even realized how little bit of character work it was where the deputy looked and went for the gun first and John pulled and aimed before the gun even left the holster. Man I love red dead redemption
You can see it in the final showdown of rdr2, look closely and Arthur is just slightly quicker on the draw than mr. rat , he would’ve won that duel canon wise
@sunshoe-l5r i doubt that. They're both really even When Sean gets shot, micah gets an instantaneous headshot on a gray out of view on a roof, while duel weilding. The one who shot Sean. Dosent matter if you like micah or not. He's a really good gunfighter, maybe even better than arthur. I doubt you care though. You're probably one of those simple minded "micah bad arthur good" people
This started in AC odyssey. The cinematography, body movement, and factual expressions got so much worse because they focused on visual fidelity and completely ignored everything else
@@Ravenbones Nope not black flag or origins. It started with odyssey. Ac games till Origins had cinematic mo- cap cutscenes for it entire story missions. Its from odyssey where they introduced dialogue choices that they went animated cutscenes.
outlaws seems like filler meant to take up space and give the player exposition for the next objective RDR is a full blown character driven interaction between 4 very different people
This. The Outlaws scene was purely to dump exposition on the player and break up the pacing with a cutscene. The RDR scene was directed with the characters in the scene in mind, saying what was actually said in the scene. With Outlaws you could completely replace the audio and nothing else would need to be changed.
I do think the point of the video is not the aesthethics but the narrative if you watch it the red dead is running a longer runtine but outlaws seems longer
First one.. cringey.. clunky.. bad animation. Character is full of themselves. Second one.. Good writing and animation... damn good. Period. Nothing else to say lol
I feel what made the RDR 1 better is the camera angles and movement of it feeling more dynamic, and the writing of dialogue as well and the art style No matter how good the graphics are, art style will always be better Example, Halo CE and the remaster
Judging gameplay footage, i truly believe star wars outlaws was meant as a kids game, with medium priority. And RDR1 was an adult game. But comparing Ubisoft with Rockstar is like comparing factory presliced bread loafs to Deli sourdough bread.
Not really. It's like comparing a baker that doesn't take his time to properly make the dough and bake the bread compared to a baker who does. Why wouldn't you be able to compare Ubisoft to rockstar? Ubisoft have talented developers just like rockstar, the only difference being is that Ubisoft is short sighted and wants short term investment to make a quick bucks while rockstar doesn't have to worry about that.
According to the Wikipedia Red Dead Redemption had a development and marketing budget between US$80 million and US$100 million. Adjusting that for a 2024 inflation it will be US$115 million and US$143,7 million. That is still far less then between US$200 million and US$300 million development and marketing budget that Star Wars Outlaws had.
seeing the protagonist of the new fable game was enough for me to be worried, every game post fable 1 had the choice of male or female, so being forced to be female seems like a huge step backwards in terms of choice
I remember when it was 2007-2011 & we cared about both visuals & gameplay, but since AAA is a downward spiral of not so good now it's like "I don't care as long as the gameplay is good", the mentality is so weird, we had both & many cared about both. The standards & the bar isn't just low, it's on the ground. If only peoples would defend the honour of their: spouse, cousin, brother, sister, mother, father as heavily & passionately as they defend these greedy corporations that 10 years ago had 95% different peoples working in the dev team. A logo is really connection to many it seems.
In case you didn't get that they're going for a western theme, they gave her a cowboy hat. Ya know, just like how they gave Timothy Olyphant a bandana and a southern accent. I miss subtlety.
As a kid i would jump between PS2, PS1, Mega Drive, Game Boy, graphics didn't matter and they all offered different but excellent experiences. Good will always be good regardless of things like graphics, people are still falling in love with games like Metal Gear Solid, songs by Michael Jackson, films from the 80's, great is always great.
To a certain degree I agree, but it's not like Massive had never made anything except loot shooters. Before The Division, they where involved in a Mobile Game, and before that the made strategy games. It's also usually easier to go from multi to single player than the other way around. Adding good tools for cutscene editing and facial animation probably doesn't necessitate rewriting large foundational parts of the engine. I think they could have pulled it off, if they were given some more time and allowed to hire the necessary expertise. It looks like they were stretched pretty thin. They were at least somewhat involved with developing new content for The Division 2 well into the production of Pandora and Outlaws. Then they released 2 pretty big titles in the span of just about 9 Month.
6:00 Executives do understand. But most often it is not about who is qualified but rather who is available. So why not just not do it? That's not how funding works sometimes. You use it or lose it.
when you make trash that doesn't make money you are also losing the funding but also time that is why not just do it. stupid brain rot thinking like that is why the industry is collapsing.
There's probably some truth to what Luke is saying but I don't think it's that simple. There are plenty of studios that are made of much smaller teams with lower budgets that make a much higher quality product for their first game.
The problem is the scene direction, not the technology. The Outlaws scene could have been about anything. You can replace the dialogue with anything and it would still be of the same quality. The RDR scene was directed to have you feel a certain way about the characters in the scene. Outside of the mouths being matched to the dialogue, if you were to replace the dialogue the scene wouldn't make sense. I believe with Outlaws (knowing it's rushed development) this design choice with the cutscenes was purposeful. Making the cutscenes more generic made them easier to adjust when elements inevitably changed. A script change, a character swap or cut content would have minimal impact on other elements. Someone made a call for quick production over quality. Getting the game shipped on time was important enough that lower quality cutscenes was acceptable.
That whole tangent with fallout was pointless, since these are not multiplayer games. The comparison wasn't even about the tech, it was about the developers.
The general graphical downgrades aren't even limited to just the "bad games", even the "good or great" AAA games today do not look as good as games did from the 2015-2017 era, before TAA became mainstream.
Its like we went backwards. But you can't compare Star Wars outlaws vs Red Dead Redemption 1. Because RDR is a masterpiece, while outlaws was a disaster. Its like basically a comparison between veteran developers vs rookie developers.
@@LexiconPrime7 enjoying a game is great but the game is objectively a bad video game. You're able to like sh*t, but don't confuse it for something that it is not.
problem isn't the engine, the outlaws scene either isn't using mocap, or the if they did use mocap they did it really badly and of course, the voice acting and dialogue is just way better in the RDR scene
IMHO Comparing Rockstar and Ubisoft is laughable with Ubisoft's current state. Rockstar doesn't put out a game that isn't polished to hell while also haveing very questionable labor practices. Yet Ubisoft let Assassin's Creed Unity release in a completely unplayable state. (not to mention the bugs that were in Outlaws when it launched.) I mean no one launched Outlaws expecting Rockstar level of detail right?
Should have done DA: Veilguard vs Witcher 3 Wild Hunt like Asmongold. The level of writing is standing out like sore thumb when you compare the two... I just want to make people remember that Wild Hunt is from 2015... 10 years.
If you could turn off Depth of Field in Outlaws and it would look more like RDR. TH-cam's compression always makes Depth of Field look even worse than it does in game which is why I turn it off when I can when recording playthroughs for TH-cam. There is no Depth of Field in RDR which makes it look much better IMO.
of course, but if im comparing them to rockstar or fromsoft, its a tough competiton. Especially with rockstar because they made foundations for video games throughout the history. My favorite naughtydog game is actually crash bandicoot lol
@@captainhostile101 That's cool, I like Crash. Uncharted 4 is my favorite ND game. In terms of technology and budget and talent to match that budget, Naughty Dog is very competent. They have a mastery of things like motion and facial capture, even beating Rockstar in that department. Uncharted 4 still looks amazing to this day
@@js_longback2299 i think a better example of motion capture would be the last of us. to me last of us didnt even need a remaster, it looks amazing for a ps3 title but also in 2013 came out gta 5 which is a wonder how it fitted on ps3 and xbox 360 technical wise. San Andreas also pushed ps2 to the very limit, so i am more comparing those kind of things in a company.
Ive seen a number of reactions to this.. like a long time ago. And I don't understand the point. It is not about the engine, it is about writing, cinematic choices and not least voice acting.
Modern sci-fi/fantasy writers have simply lost the ability to construct an allegory or understand parallelism or subtlety. I imagine they wanted to make something that was like a Western. So... it's 99% Western with 1% alien-like. There's an episode of Picard where they HAD to comment on ICE and immigration. Well... Star Trek is PERFECT for paralleling this subject because it has multiple alien races and they did a good job of portraying prejudice and racism even in the original series in the 60's. How did they do that in Star Trek Picard? They go back in time and the "Hispanic" captain was locked up in prison by ICE. No allegory! 😅
What I don’t get is that the facial animations looked amazing in Avatar Frontiers of Pandora which was also massive and using the same engine. Outlaws looks amazing in every other category so I just don’t know wth happened where the faces look so dated. It’s like something they meant to go back to and then just never did.
We can’t compare rockstar games to Ubisoft games, one company spends years to perfect games while Ubisoft think they can make open world games in 2 years
All the Far Cry games are amazing, I think FC4 & FC3 were around 2 & those games look, feel, sound, play, amazing. Something is different. Assassin's Creed Revelations also 1 year & is great as well.
2:14 are we seriosly coping because of engine overhauls now? are we just going to ignore that they admit more than half thd team has never made a game before? I dont thing engine overhauls can makr up for a lack of experience.
I just think this conversation is so overblown. Like yeah, it's not the hugest upgrade, but video games went from Pong to Cyberpunk in 50 years. Idk if any other industry can claim such rapid acceleration. Plus, there is obviously a ceiling to graphics: reality. Where else is there to go besides the next plane of dimension? We're approaching photorealism with the crutch of AI and now with path tracing we're almost at realistic lighting. The rest of the pie is going to optimization and ppl are even bitching about DLSS and "fake" frames. Where else is there to go? And what's the end goal of the argument, that they should drop the price of new games to what Red Dead costs on 360 today because the graphics haven't gotten better? Lol. I'm just worried that this constant groaning is going to lead to higher priced games. DLSS is fake frames? Okay, here is true 4k at 240 frames, $100 please. Character models aren't "real" enough? Okay, that costs money: $100 for our game please. Constant criticism can lead to negative effects as well. 🤷♂️
Now just compare AC:Unity and AC IV to current ubislop cutscenes even in their newer AC games they are far worse static cutscenes. Seems to have nothing to do with the engine used.
more excuses for people not getting the job done , clearly the majority of the comments dont own business and have to sell products for a living it really shows.
You are comparing two different studios. Massive never produced high quality facial animations. That is not their focus. Look at The Division. That is completely in line with Outlaws. The question you should ask is: Why did Ubisoft chose a studio that does not focus on narrative driven games for Outlaws? Massive simply might not have the animators of facial rig system for high quality animations, which would explain why some of the cutscenes are prerendered: They were likely outsourced to a different studio or did not use in game systems. In addition if the gameplay is engaging the quality of the animation doesn't matter that much. Just look at New Vegas. All this is not an indicator for the "state of the art" today and this discussion is somewhat pointless. The writing quality however, is a different chapter altogether, If the animators don't have something to work with you can't expect a mind blowing performance.
I’m happy people like Luke understands the differences/nuance between developers and engines. I believe the video is trying to hurt Ubisoft. I played the game with the right expectations and they were met with a little more to surprise me. Some (like executives many a times) just think every developer can make anything with any engine. Would I like it if facial movements and cutscenes were better, sure, but I have played the games they made before and put my expectations at that level.
there's just No excuse for new games to look worse have worse gameplay and worse physics and worse AI annd worse stories then literally 15 years old games hell even 20 years old games especially now with all this tech and games been so expensive i'm just happy there's so many good games already out and i don't have to even look at thos new garbage
And you say you like games… the difference is motion capture. This is a technology that is a) very expensive b) time consuming and c) not right for every game. Motion capture delivers the best animations but comes at the cost of responsiveness in-game. As the game has to animate the motions as dictated by the motion capture. And having seamlessly integration of non-motion captured animations and motion captured animations is difficult. It requires 2 entirely different animation engines to work together. This idiot masquerades as a game enthusiast, goes around acting like he knows everything when his knowledge is entirely surface level and based on his followers opinions. No wonder he had to plagiarise someone else’s work. He sucks at this stuff.
4:39 I STRONGLY DISAGREE! Division had some of the best story telling in gaming. It was absolutely insane, gamers throw around handholding all the time. Well the division is a great example of gamers needing there handheld to digest a story.
I recently played Metro 2033 (2010 OG version) on my channel, and I think it looks better than Stalker 2, which just came out a month ago. I made a video on my channel showing the lighting.
@@flannelsykes0 I expected a reply like this. Max Payne 3 doesn't feel quite like those games though. Different movement and feel to it. I really like those older Max Paynes to, but Rockstar had to build their own shooting mechanic's from the groundup. They didn't just press a button and copy and paste gameplay from Max Payne 2 so my point still stands.
@js_longback2299 I'm not totally hating on Rockstar but they tend to get a pass in their open world games because nearly every other aspect of their games is so highly polished. Payne 3 is their best game for actual handling and mechanics.
At that point, Rockstar was behind 2K Czech on technical aspects. In 2012, they got 2K Czech to improve gameplay and animations for GTA V. Some talent eventually ended up in Rockstar when 2K Czech was merged with Hangar 13. While Mafia 3 came up underwhelming, that talent went crazy animating RDR2.
@@FINKnATORit is you can argue animations are worse but graphically down to the pixal outlaws is better undebatablly , which is expected and whats debatable is if thats still unacceptable or not which it isnt
@@FortFinesse007 Uninteresting lighting and poor voice acting too. Sure it’s a higher resolution, and has a few more polygons, but what makes it “clearly look better”?
@@FortFinesse007 Outlaws literally looks like AI generated slop. One person dev could make a better model and rig it with free programs lol. Red dead has an artstyle and that helps a lot in making sure that the game stays relevant for longer. Meanwhile starwars outlaws uses shortcuts and because of that they end up with something that can be made in few hours on unreal engine
To be successful, Division 3 MUST have a deeper and more attractive story than D1 and D2. It MUST deliver high quality cutscenes. I think, Avatar and SW: Outlaws were the 'tutorial' for the team, kind of. Now they have to know what changes should be made to create a successful Division 3.
Letting the team have a "tutorial" when the company on losing strike is crazy 😂 Like can they do it or not? If its true thats toxic positivity at its finest
@@amoksapandega8668, well, obviously they considered these two projects to be relatively safe investments. Just remember, when they started, the company was in good conditions.
@@VlReaderr , you do know that Ubisoft stock in decline since 2021 right? its not just happen in a snap of a finger Sure the public or we may realise this late, but im pretty sure inside Ubisoft the company themself already know this i mean if they dont take this seriously and still creating these half baked games, or if you are right playing around with this 'tutorial for the team" this downfall and financial crisis is well derserved
@@65firered, of course, they're screwed. But what could they do? The Division 3 critically needs strong story and cutscenes. Even The Division 2 needed them.
This is a dumb comparison tbh, red dead is a story focused game. The Star wars game was meant to be a turn brain of after work game Ubisoft had big success with in the past. The bland writing isn't accidental it's on purpose
![FILMMAKER REACTS: RED DEAD REDEMPTION | [ALL CUTSCENES - PART 1!!] | OUR JOURNEY STARTS HERE!](/img/n.gif)
Whoever said Starwars Outlaws was Red Dead Redemption 2 in space needs to be evaluated
😂Honest to god
Its not even on the level of RDR 1 in terms of its open world.
fr man that live chat is full of nonsense
@@samcro9184it wasn’t just the chat.. a journalist said that in an article
Technical differences doesn't really matter, it's the writing and directing that matters and it has nothing to do with the progression of technology.
Exactly, they could compare Outlaws with Metal Gear Solid 1 for PS1 and it would still beat the sheet out of SW.
@@MADEIN1TALY Star Wars Outlaws has better cutscenes that Metal Gear Solid 1.
@@Mitch93636”better”
@@Mitch93636 in your dreams maybe 🤣
@@MADEIN1TALY Nope. Real and Hardcore Gamers AGREE, that Star Wars Outlaws has better cutscenes that Metal Gear Solid 1.
The facial animations aren't just down to the game engine. The game engine uses the facial animations created by the animators. So if they create bad facial animations, it will look bad.
The bad lip syncing is down to an automated tool in the game engine. But they do have tools to go in & manually adjust the animation.
I don't care about lip sinc if the writing is great, i will not even notice it, but when it's bad just like that Star war crap you notice it. The same with the graphics, RDR was not that good looking but you don't mind when animation look real and characters are great.
@@kukipett RDR at the time looked amazing, so its simply not true that it was not good looking, like, come on lol
@@kukipett This is a game that was released 15 years ago on the PS3. it was one of the best looking games ever made.
@@aniruddhadas1011 You know i play those games since 30 years so i'm fully aware of what those games looked like when i played them when they first released. But i just wanted to compare with actual games that have great graphics but horrific writing. So those old games with dated graphics are still globally looking better than a star wars Outlaws.
The thing is, man, is that the same studio that made SW Outlaws somehow did facial and performance animation WAY better in 2014 with AC Unity. Also, game engines are developed by software engineers.
For the "bad lip sync thing," for a fully baked cutscenes like that it's only make sense to capture all of actor's performance rather than use only the body and just half the facial performance (because why would they use face Cam when its mainly use is to capture lip and eyes performance?)
I think it mostly comes down to how cinematic the RDR cutscene feels (camera positions), the blocking/business of the scene and the dialogue... the facial animations aren't THAT much different but you can tell that Outlaws just utilized an automated tool and said "done" while RDR has a lot more intention shown with their faces... the RDR scene feels more realistic and ALIVE
DEI is the difference
@@mrX666-s9pHave you even played the game? I have, there’s not a single forced inclusion in the whole game. The game itself is laughably bad, but there’s no DEI in it. Criticize it for what it is, a mediocre game.
@@turkeyman9914I believe they’re referring to the people who actually worked on it, and they’re probably correct. Looking at team photos from the people behind these projects is night and day compared to when games had actual talent behind them.
Regular looking dudes whose most interesting quality is their talent, VS people who look like they’re supposed to be in a parade, and their most interesting quality is their pronouns.
Whether you agree or not, you can’t deny there’s been a definitive shift in who you see working in the industry.
@@Brumsly Oh sure, but it’s not exclusive to the gaming industry. Still, companies are clearly noticing people are getting annoyed at their forced inclusions everywhere. Disney literally removed a trans character from one of their series because they know they’ll lose money because people can’t stand it.
@@turkeyman9914 Agreed, it’s certainly not exclusive to one industry. Yea, there’s been a lot of talk around the fact that companies are starting to get the message that regular people are fed up, but if it makes much of a difference remains to be seen.
There’s a LOT of money in conforming to the wishes of Blackrock and ESG scores for the heads of these companies.
“We’ve learned how to force behavior.”
-Larry Fink
Comparing an Ubisoft game to a Rockstar game is like comparing a bar of chocolate to a grape
Thank you. I saw this and was like what are we doing?
A Godiva chocolate bar to rotten grapes from the flea market.
While I agree, that argument doesn’t hold up for a game they had had a decade to catch up in quality. It’s not like rdr1 is the most up to date rockstar game
It's a shame that this question would actually be a competition back in 2010. When both of these companies were trying their best.
not really, the AC cutscenes from around the era of RDR1 are much closer to RDR1 than outlaws is
RDR1 and 2 could be HBO series. Like deadwood or Boardwalk empire, from the dialogue to the acting, they are just in another level.
hell on wheels is somewhat similar and entertaining. If RDR got band of brothers treatment I'd be in heaven
Art style and framing seem to be forgotten in certain new games like outlaws. Companies seem to just want to strive for the best graphics and frame rates. A good art style can look timeless.
nah just graphics. frame rates dont matter to them at all .
To be fair, people have demanded and thrown temper tantrums for years that every single new game has to look ultra realistic above everything else. Why else do you think the majority of popular games last generation were just ubisoft clones with shiny graphics and almost no diversity in gameplay or style.
Obviously there were occasional outliers, but everybody voted with their wallets and said they want nothing but washed out color schemes with photo realistic graphics and extremely boring gameplay with recycled stories we watched in movies and shows a decade earlier.
@@TheJohhnyE I couldn’t agree more
In my opinion this demand for always better graphics and better everything is a problem that gaming business created themselves from the start. Always telling that this game has better graphics than competition and this hardware is more powerful than the others. Sure, it is easiest way to convince consumer that they should buy your product, but sooner or later you will hit the point in graphics that they stop will mattering so much, and art style and art direction becomes much more important when creating a good looking game. Also, many people confuse good art style with good graphics. It is not strictly about what amount of polygons or pixels you have , but how you use them.
Never even realized how little bit of character work it was where the deputy looked and went for the gun first and John pulled and aimed before the gun even left the holster. Man I love red dead redemption
You can see it in the final showdown of rdr2, look closely and Arthur is just slightly quicker on the draw than mr. rat , he would’ve won that duel canon wise
@sunshoe-l5r i doubt that. They're both really even
When Sean gets shot, micah gets an instantaneous headshot on a gray out of view on a roof, while duel weilding. The one who shot Sean. Dosent matter if you like micah or not. He's a really good gunfighter, maybe even better than arthur.
I doubt you care though. You're probably one of those simple minded "micah bad arthur good" people
This started in AC odyssey. The cinematography, body movement, and factual expressions got so much worse because they focused on visual fidelity and completely ignored everything else
It started with Origins. Got worse with Valhalla. Technically it started with Black Flag but thats a different discussion.
@@Ravenbones Nope not black flag or origins. It started with odyssey. Ac games till Origins had cinematic mo- cap cutscenes for it entire story missions. Its from odyssey where they introduced dialogue choices that they went animated cutscenes.
outlaws seems like filler meant to take up space and give the player exposition for the next objective
RDR is a full blown character driven interaction between 4 very different people
This. The Outlaws scene was purely to dump exposition on the player and break up the pacing with a cutscene.
The RDR scene was directed with the characters in the scene in mind, saying what was actually said in the scene. With Outlaws you could completely replace the audio and nothing else would need to be changed.
I do think the point of the video is not the aesthethics but the narrative if you watch it the red dead is running a longer runtine but outlaws seems longer
First one.. cringey.. clunky.. bad animation. Character is full of themselves.
Second one.. Good writing and animation... damn good. Period. Nothing else to say lol
"Character is full of themselves" lmao
I feel what made the RDR 1 better is the camera angles and movement of it feeling more dynamic, and the writing of dialogue as well and the art style
No matter how good the graphics are, art style will always be better
Example, Halo CE and the remaster
Judging gameplay footage, i truly believe star wars outlaws was meant as a kids game, with medium priority. And RDR1 was an adult game. But comparing Ubisoft with Rockstar is like comparing factory presliced bread loafs to Deli sourdough bread.
Not really. It's like comparing a baker that doesn't take his time to properly make the dough and bake the bread compared to a baker who does.
Why wouldn't you be able to compare Ubisoft to rockstar? Ubisoft have talented developers just like rockstar, the only difference being is that Ubisoft is short sighted and wants short term investment to make a quick bucks while rockstar doesn't have to worry about that.
@@ueg3618 You wrote the same thing with different words.
When you started smoking a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away
According to the Wikipedia Red Dead Redemption had a development and marketing budget between US$80 million and US$100 million. Adjusting that for a 2024 inflation it will be US$115 million and US$143,7 million. That is still far less then between US$200 million and US$300 million development and marketing budget that Star Wars Outlaws had.
Writing good dialogue doesn't require a boatload of budget
It does feel like now if they make a game with 2010 graphics it will have 2025 performance
This is why I’m sceptical about the Fable game. Why they got Playground Studios to make it when they make Forza is crazy to me
Creative Assembly that made the Total War games, made Alien Isolation, which was a very good game.
@@FordHoard Asobo Studio that created A Plague Tale 1 and 2, also made Flight simulator 2020-24 lol
@fliko6808 Oh I had no idea they did those games! That's cool
seeing the protagonist of the new fable game was enough for me to be worried, every game post fable 1 had the choice of male or female, so being forced to be female seems like a huge step backwards in terms of choice
Glad to see RDR1 getting some spotlight again.
A little bit of personality, writing, and camera work goes a long way in making the RDR1 scene immediately more engaging.
I remember when it was 2007-2011 & we cared about both visuals & gameplay, but since AAA is a downward spiral of not so good now it's like "I don't care as long as the gameplay is good", the mentality is so weird, we had both & many cared about both. The standards & the bar isn't just low, it's on the ground. If only peoples would defend the honour of their: spouse, cousin, brother, sister, mother, father as heavily & passionately as they defend these greedy corporations that 10 years ago had 95% different peoples working in the dev team. A logo is really connection to many it seems.
1:03 this being the level of performance the main protagonist is giving is crazy, you'd atleast expect her to up to parr
comparing Outlaws to RDR is like comparing Madame Webb to The Dark Knight
Good on Luke for bringing context into the comparison.
In case you didn't get that they're going for a western theme, they gave her a cowboy hat. Ya know, just like how they gave Timothy Olyphant a bandana and a southern accent.
I miss subtlety.
rdr john sounds so good love how stern and stoic he sounds
As a kid i would jump between PS2, PS1, Mega Drive, Game Boy, graphics didn't matter and they all offered different but excellent experiences.
Good will always be good regardless of things like graphics, people are still falling in love with games like Metal Gear Solid, songs by Michael Jackson, films from the 80's, great is always great.
To a certain degree I agree, but it's not like Massive had never made anything except loot shooters. Before The Division, they where involved in a Mobile Game, and before that the made strategy games.
It's also usually easier to go from multi to single player than the other way around. Adding good tools for cutscene editing and facial animation probably doesn't necessitate rewriting large foundational parts of the engine.
I think they could have pulled it off, if they were given some more time and allowed to hire the necessary expertise.
It looks like they were stretched pretty thin. They were at least somewhat involved with developing new content for The Division 2 well into the production of Pandora and Outlaws. Then they released 2 pretty big titles in the span of just about 9 Month.
6:00 Executives do understand. But most often it is not about who is qualified but rather who is available. So why not just not do it? That's not how funding works sometimes. You use it or lose it.
when you make trash that doesn't make money you are also losing the funding but also time that is why not just do it. stupid brain rot thinking like that is why the industry is collapsing.
The star wars one is so....flat. It sounds like a damn table read.
The dumbest part is the sherif teaches Kay by shooting a few bottles. That's all it took to become a skilled blaster wielder.
Goes to show how writing and direction can impact a scene.
There's probably some truth to what Luke is saying but I don't think it's that simple. There are plenty of studios that are made of much smaller teams with lower budgets that make a much higher quality product for their first game.
We really came a long way from star wars outlaws
Would be lovely if we got a remastered version of RDR for PS5 with updated graphics. The story is fantastic.
The problem is the scene direction, not the technology.
The Outlaws scene could have been about anything. You can replace the dialogue with anything and it would still be of the same quality.
The RDR scene was directed to have you feel a certain way about the characters in the scene. Outside of the mouths being matched to the dialogue, if you were to replace the dialogue the scene wouldn't make sense.
I believe with Outlaws (knowing it's rushed development) this design choice with the cutscenes was purposeful. Making the cutscenes more generic made them easier to adjust when elements inevitably changed. A script change, a character swap or cut content would have minimal impact on other elements.
Someone made a call for quick production over quality. Getting the game shipped on time was important enough that lower quality cutscenes was acceptable.
That whole tangent with fallout was pointless, since these are not multiplayer games. The comparison wasn't even about the tech, it was about the developers.
It's better if you compared outlaw to ac4 black flag which was released 11 years before outlaw.
14 yrs is 2 generations apart. Thats scary how lowbindustry standards have come down to.
The general graphical downgrades aren't even limited to just the "bad games", even the "good or great" AAA games today do not look as good as games did from the 2015-2017 era, before TAA became mainstream.
Its like we went backwards. But you can't compare Star Wars outlaws vs Red Dead Redemption 1. Because RDR is a masterpiece, while outlaws was a disaster.
Its like basically a comparison between veteran developers vs rookie developers.
That’s bs, Outlaws is a really fun game
@@elodszekely5979 Its not. Stop defending Ubisoft slop.
@@joefield5217 Right, because enjoying a game is a terrible thing.
@@LexiconPrime7 It is, when its a bad game.
@@LexiconPrime7 enjoying a game is great but the game is objectively a bad video game. You're able to like sh*t, but don't confuse it for something that it is not.
problem isn't the engine, the outlaws scene either isn't using mocap, or the if they did use mocap they did it really badly
and of course, the voice acting and dialogue is just way better in the RDR scene
I mean sure, some studios/teams will be better at one thing than another....but 14 years.
IMHO Comparing Rockstar and Ubisoft is laughable with Ubisoft's current state.
Rockstar doesn't put out a game that isn't polished to hell while also haveing very questionable labor practices. Yet Ubisoft let Assassin's Creed Unity release in a completely unplayable state. (not to mention the bugs that were in Outlaws when it launched.) I mean no one launched Outlaws expecting Rockstar level of detail right?
In 4k they would look way better too, this is just 1440p
Should have done DA: Veilguard vs Witcher 3 Wild Hunt like Asmongold. The level of writing is standing out like sore thumb when you compare the two...
I just want to make people remember that Wild Hunt is from 2015... 10 years.
one scene is obviously mo-capped and staged while the other is just either key framed and canned animations.
If you could turn off Depth of Field in Outlaws and it would look more like RDR. TH-cam's compression always makes Depth of Field look even worse than it does in game which is why I turn it off when I can when recording playthroughs for TH-cam. There is no Depth of Field in RDR which makes it look much better IMO.
That is why Rockstar imo are the most competent video game company in the modern world. Rockstar and FromSoftware and I dont think anyone comes close.
Naughty dog as well, regardless of what you think about their games.
of course, but if im comparing them to rockstar or fromsoft, its a tough competiton. Especially with rockstar because they made foundations for video games throughout the history. My favorite naughtydog game is actually crash bandicoot lol
@@captainhostile101 That's cool, I like Crash. Uncharted 4 is my favorite ND game. In terms of technology and budget and talent to match that budget, Naughty Dog is very competent. They have a mastery of things like motion and facial capture, even beating Rockstar in that department. Uncharted 4 still looks amazing to this day
@@js_longback2299 i think a better example of motion capture would be the last of us. to me last of us didnt even need a remaster, it looks amazing for a ps3 title but also in 2013 came out gta 5 which is a wonder how it fitted on ps3 and xbox 360 technical wise. San Andreas also pushed ps2 to the very limit, so i am more comparing those kind of things in a company.
@@js_longback2299If we're talking about graphics and animation alone, sure.
Ive seen a number of reactions to this.. like a long time ago. And I don't understand the point. It is not about the engine, it is about writing, cinematic choices and not least voice acting.
*_Scowtszzz._*
She sounds like the unbelievably gay version of Bronco out of Gentlemen Broncos.
2:18 X to doubt
Modern sci-fi/fantasy writers have simply lost the ability to construct an allegory or understand parallelism or subtlety. I imagine they wanted to make something that was like a Western. So... it's 99% Western with 1% alien-like. There's an episode of Picard where they HAD to comment on ICE and immigration. Well... Star Trek is PERFECT for paralleling this subject because it has multiple alien races and they did a good job of portraying prejudice and racism even in the original series in the 60's. How did they do that in Star Trek Picard? They go back in time and the "Hispanic" captain was locked up in prison by ICE. No allegory! 😅
I’ll play devil’s advocate in regards to the writing, Star Wars has always had clunky or bad dialogue/interactions
KOTOR 1 and 2 have great writing and Dilaogue.
What I don’t get is that the facial animations looked amazing in Avatar Frontiers of Pandora which was also massive and using the same engine. Outlaws looks amazing in every other category so I just don’t know wth happened where the faces look so dated. It’s like something they meant to go back to and then just never did.
We can’t compare rockstar games to Ubisoft games, one company spends years to perfect games while Ubisoft think they can make open world games in 2 years
All the Far Cry games are amazing, I think FC4 & FC3 were around 2 & those games look, feel, sound, play, amazing. Something is different. Assassin's Creed Revelations also 1 year & is great as well.
Red dead 1 came 2 years after GTA 4, and star wars outlaws was 3 years in development
2:14 are we seriosly coping because of engine overhauls now? are we just going to ignore that they admit more than half thd team has never made a game before? I dont thing engine overhauls can makr up for a lack of experience.
I don't get this comparisons, one game is made by rockstar and other one is ubislop, how can you compare them. Compare ubisofts game and then insult
I just think this conversation is so overblown. Like yeah, it's not the hugest upgrade, but video games went from Pong to Cyberpunk in 50 years. Idk if any other industry can claim such rapid acceleration.
Plus, there is obviously a ceiling to graphics: reality. Where else is there to go besides the next plane of dimension? We're approaching photorealism with the crutch of AI and now with path tracing we're almost at realistic lighting. The rest of the pie is going to optimization and ppl are even bitching about DLSS and "fake" frames. Where else is there to go? And what's the end goal of the argument, that they should drop the price of new games to what Red Dead costs on 360 today because the graphics haven't gotten better? Lol. I'm just worried that this constant groaning is going to lead to higher priced games. DLSS is fake frames? Okay, here is true 4k at 240 frames, $100 please. Character models aren't "real" enough? Okay, that costs money: $100 for our game please. Constant criticism can lead to negative effects as well. 🤷♂️
Just start focusing on the game, rather than the message
whats the message
@MannersShark DEI, inclusivity
i forgot the rest
JMGG, just make good games.
Its just a coincidence that the scene he uses is also terribly written.
i haven't played it but with her face in the star wars game?
That cut scene from Outlaws is the type of cut scene I would freaking skip because it's so... uninteresting, boring, flat. Just... end it already!
Why is Luke trying to be the guy from pirate software using MS paint in his videos
Now just compare AC:Unity and AC IV to current ubislop cutscenes even in their newer AC games they are far worse static cutscenes.
Seems to have nothing to do with the engine used.
more excuses for people not getting the job done , clearly the majority of the comments dont own business and have to sell products for a living it really shows.
I mean, it's comparing of one the best written/acted games ever made against Ubisoft slop.
You are comparing two different studios. Massive never produced high quality facial animations. That is not their focus. Look at The Division. That is completely in line with Outlaws. The question you should ask is: Why did Ubisoft chose a studio that does not focus on narrative driven games for Outlaws?
Massive simply might not have the animators of facial rig system for high quality animations, which would explain why some of the cutscenes are prerendered: They were likely outsourced to a different studio or did not use in game systems.
In addition if the gameplay is engaging the quality of the animation doesn't matter that much. Just look at New Vegas.
All this is not an indicator for the "state of the art" today and this discussion is somewhat pointless. The writing quality however, is a different chapter altogether, If the animators don't have something to work with you can't expect a mind blowing performance.
I’m happy people like Luke understands the differences/nuance between developers and engines. I believe the video is trying to hurt Ubisoft. I played the game with the right expectations and they were met with a little more to surprise me. Some (like executives many a times) just think every developer can make anything with any engine. Would I like it if facial movements and cutscenes were better, sure, but I have played the games they made before and put my expectations at that level.
Your grandma is from outer space?
there's just No excuse for new games to look worse have worse gameplay and worse physics and worse AI annd worse stories then literally 15 years old games hell even 20 years old games especially now with all this tech and games been so expensive i'm just happy there's so many good games already out and i don't have to even look at thos new garbage
3:09
And you say you like games… the difference is motion capture. This is a technology that is a) very expensive b) time consuming and c) not right for every game.
Motion capture delivers the best animations but comes at the cost of responsiveness in-game. As the game has to animate the motions as dictated by the motion capture.
And having seamlessly integration of non-motion captured animations and motion captured animations is difficult. It requires 2 entirely different animation engines to work together.
This idiot masquerades as a game enthusiast, goes around acting like he knows everything when his knowledge is entirely surface level and based on his followers opinions.
No wonder he had to plagiarise someone else’s work. He sucks at this stuff.
First one seems like a parody
Anyway you got paid to avoid saying anything bad about this game, this is one of the worst games of the year
4:39 I STRONGLY DISAGREE! Division had some of the best story telling in gaming. It was absolutely insane, gamers throw around handholding all the time. Well the division is a great example of gamers needing there handheld to digest a story.
I recently played Metro 2033 (2010 OG version) on my channel, and I think it looks better than Stalker 2, which just came out a month ago. I made a video on my channel showing the lighting.
Lets not forget though that Rockstar games do not excel at gameplay. Mediocre gunplay and stodgy movement being two huge culprits.
In their open world games yeah. But they also made Max Payne 3 which has excellent gunplay
@js_longback2299 Having copied Remedy's excellent first two games.
@@flannelsykes0 I expected a reply like this. Max Payne 3 doesn't feel quite like those games though. Different movement and feel to it. I really like those older Max Paynes to, but Rockstar had to build their own shooting mechanic's from the groundup. They didn't just press a button and copy and paste gameplay from Max Payne 2 so my point still stands.
@js_longback2299 I'm not totally hating on Rockstar but they tend to get a pass in their open world games because nearly every other aspect of their games is so highly polished. Payne 3 is their best game for actual handling and mechanics.
@@flannelsykes0 That's completely fair. I agree entirely
I bet your the type of person who compares “ Wicked” with “The Godfather “ two completely different style of games.
I mean, clearly Outlaws looks better, but not 10 years better. Rockstar also looked several years ahead of anyone.
I’m not sure it’s clearly better looking.
At that point, Rockstar was behind 2K Czech on technical aspects. In 2012, they got 2K Czech to improve gameplay and animations for GTA V. Some talent eventually ended up in Rockstar when 2K Czech was merged with Hangar 13. While Mafia 3 came up underwhelming, that talent went crazy animating RDR2.
@@FINKnATORit is you can argue animations are worse but graphically down to the pixal outlaws is better undebatablly , which is expected and whats debatable is if thats still unacceptable or not which it isnt
@@FortFinesse007 Uninteresting lighting and poor voice acting too. Sure it’s a higher resolution, and has a few more polygons, but what makes it “clearly look better”?
@@FortFinesse007 Outlaws literally looks like AI generated slop. One person dev could make a better model and rig it with free programs lol. Red dead has an artstyle and that helps a lot in making sure that the game stays relevant for longer. Meanwhile starwars outlaws uses shortcuts and because of that they end up with something that can be made in few hours on unreal engine
To be successful, Division 3 MUST have a deeper and more attractive story than D1 and D2. It MUST deliver high quality cutscenes. I think, Avatar and SW: Outlaws were the 'tutorial' for the team, kind of. Now they have to know what changes should be made to create a successful Division 3.
Letting the team have a "tutorial" when the company on losing strike is crazy 😂
Like can they do it or not?
If its true thats toxic positivity at its finest
@@amoksapandega8668, well, obviously they considered these two projects to be relatively safe investments. Just remember, when they started, the company was in good conditions.
@@VlReaderr , you do know that Ubisoft stock in decline since 2021 right? its not just happen in a snap of a finger
Sure the public or we may realise this late, but im pretty sure inside Ubisoft the company themself already know this
i mean if they dont take this seriously and still creating these half baked games, or if you are right playing around with this 'tutorial for the team" this downfall and financial crisis is well derserved
If this is their tutorial... yeah they're screwed.
@@65firered, of course, they're screwed. But what could they do? The Division 3 critically needs strong story and cutscenes. Even The Division 2 needed them.
This is a dumb comparison tbh, red dead is a story focused game. The Star wars game was meant to be a turn brain of after work game Ubisoft had big success with in the past. The bland writing isn't accidental it's on purpose
And Ubisoft is shocked the game failed.