LOL, I’m sure there are far worse than me. Remember Ash? Don’t make me spell out his whole user handle for you 
When the KS page first went up with that image it had a caption right under saying it was concept art and not indicative of the final game at all.
Just like how when you boot up game demos they have a disclaimer for the same exact thing??
Sure, but one is a demo of actual content and one is a piece of concept art before any actual development has been done. Do you really not understand the massive difference in the two things you are comparing here?
I hope its just a clone of Oo
I think its less money wise, and more time wise.
Sprites take afuck long to do, and if they’re going for 60fps then they have to do a lot of reworks of sprites.
Easier to do it all with a 3d model.
Yes, actually I do. On the other hand, I noted the screenshot was used more like a render target, since mocking up a screenshot is to show how something is intended to look when finalized, even when you throw disclaimers all over the place noting otherwise. It’s a common tactic used for many years in the industry to release bullshit “screenshots” to create hype, demand, and garner sales, all the way up until a game goes gold. Look at Watch Dogs trailer (I linked it) vs what we got. The “trailer” was clearly intended to showcase what the game would look like, it was their render target. Same with Alien: Colonial Marines. Both games ended up nothing like what was shown, but both games were marketed heavily based on those initial impressions.
Even if they’re labeling the fake screenshot as simple concept art, it really is more in line with a render target. Had they wanted to sell simply based on concept art, they’d have forsaken the phony screenshot and simply went with the concept art of the lead character, whatever Shanoa 2.0’s name is.
I think it depends. You can streamline the 2D process just as much as you can streamline the 3D process. Depending on how in depth you go, 3D can also take a very long time. Simple 3D like what we’ve seen in the shader test images don’t take all that much time to do, but you could make a 2D scene just as fast depending on your work flow. 2D doesn’t mean pixel art, either. VanillaWare games are not pixel art. Odin Sphere was targeting 60 FPS, in 2D games, 60 fps is how fast a game updates the screen rather than frames of animation per second. It doesn’t mean that for a 2D game, you have to draw a new frame of animation per screen update. Usually a key frame will be up for a number of frames, with a few in between maybe taking up 2 or so screen refreshes.
Again, tools today are far and beyond what they were using even 10 years ago. Bloodrayne: Betrayal looks pretty fantastic and it’s 2D. It was also done by a small developer. I’m not sure how time consuming it was, but considering guys like George Kamitani are also still working in 2D (actually, a good blend of 2D and 3D, everything is rendered using flat polys) without enormous budgets, which was the main argument against 2D in this thread. I do understand time consuming, so maybe that is the main consideration. I’ll point out again that we have an endless supply of tools at our disposal now a days, much better than when Odin Sphere came out which still looks amazing today.
It wasn’t a render target, it was never claimed to be a render target, the fact the game was said to be 3D from day 1 means that picture was never ever a render target, and the game was never going to look like that. Anyone who actually bothered to read the KS page (I certainly did and I had no intention of even donating) would know this.
Sorry but all this comes off to me is trying to excuse your inability to accept what words mean. Those disclaimers aren’t bullshit they are there to tell you that it’s concept, it’s not final, and that everything you have seen can change because it’s not final. You get disappointed by this, that is your problem and no one elses. Read the disclaimers, take them to heart and understand what the hell they mean.
As for Watch Dogs, your again comparing actual developed content and comparing it to a piece of concept work whipped up before any development had even really started.
Also Ubisoft are notorious liars, it was fooling imo to beliece any trailer out of that company, they can’t do anything right 99% of the time. This is a company who has been making AC games using t5he same engine for how many years now (since ACIII) and they are still coded pieces of shit. Completely incompetent and clearly don’t care about quality control. They are similar to "Bethesda in that regard.
Even with that said, lots of game trailers and demos have had stuff in them that is later no longer present or heavily changed. Hell movies have this shit to. Shit that is in the trailers but gets cut during editing. That’s how development works, shit changes. It’s not bullshit, it’s life.
Hmmm I knew it was going to be 2.5D but seeing the floor like that looks a little weird to me, was kind of expecting it to be at the normal Castlevania camera angle like in the concept art but with 3D models.
Kind of wish I’d chose the Vita version now, wasn’t sure if it was going to look too good to pass the PS4 version up but looking at those screens, whilst they don’t look bad, it doesn’t look like portable players will be missing out on much graphically.
Not sure which shader is better, first makes Mirim look better and makes the background seem a little less blocky somehow, but the second give the background a bit of a colder haunted castle feel.
Considering how early it still is,I wouldn’t read much into it.
If you want a good comparison, their are some Xrd pics floating around before they finalized the animations that people lost their shit over how “bad” it looked.
Can everyone just agree Xrd is the most beautiful game ever made?
Hm just saw the screenshots. There isn’t any lighting and game looks too 3D. If they go for a 2D look like Xrd they might be planning hand painted lighting and just haven’t gotten that done yet. If 3D they just haven’t set up the lighting correctly yet. It definitely lacks shading giving it a really cheap look. Definitely a work in progress.
Model and texturing job on the character could use a slight bit of work also. All pretty standard stuff for in development.
Already voted for the first filter. I hope they keep fine tuning the graphics.
I actually don’t like how the game looks 
I know I’m in the minority for that, but something looks really off with the shading style. It’s like the uncanny valley of 2D. Looks good at first, but then you see something seriously wrong with it but can’t put your finger on it.
It isn’t the newest most exciting thing, but it is still easily the best. The only 3d that comes close are ones that use various techniques to make the game look like it is 2d sprites when it really isn’t. If Iga wants this to follow the style of previous Igavanias, as he stated, then he will have to use 3d that appears 2d.
Adjusting for inflation, considering the NES had something like a 1000 games, I don’t think the budget was anywhere near what they are for games today. Teams were much smaller, usually just a few individuals, testing wasn’t as long and rigorous a process, there wasn’t as much promotion.
As for budget 3d vs 2d, we’ve seen many gorgeous looking 2d sprite indie games built on shoestring budgets.
That’s because there is a ton of free or low cost tools to create such games. Plus, a handful of guys can make a 2D game like the old days, vs a 3D game requiring way more production going into it. In general you’d need a larger team to make a 3D game because there are many more assets that need to go into it.
Factor on top of that, concept artists can also paint 2D backgrounds, and depending on the animation style, you could even piece together sprites from concept art since now a days there is more than enough power to do so. This means you don’t need separate artists just for concept art, meaning multitasking and less wages to pay. Of course, I’m sure in 3D game design there are people who multitask as well, but in general you have separate teams for modeling, texturing, concept design, and so on.
And, if you do want to make retro games, the tools are so far beyond what they used back then that it’s much easier to do now.
I thought this was po at first.
Yeah, definitely liking the toon shader better than the other ones.
that is a HUGE boob, LOLOLOL
New update with new shader samples and backgrounds.
IMO, the toon shader with “Character 3” is best and they can probably just drop the other shaders for the characters at this point.
Character 3 and Background 3 looks the best IMO.
The ribbons they added to Miriam’s arms are a cool touch and should give some nice secondary motion to Miriam’s actions like Alucard’s cloak in SOTN.