[NEW] Graphical Downgrades Fixed? | Ultimate Comparison [Image Heavy]

[WesternRev]

 

OP [Update]:

 

New comparison has been added, from the John Marston cutscene, in which he suits himself up.

 

The comparison is between Version 1.00, 1.09 and 1.29.

 

Edited August 20, 2021 by WesternRev

[Badman_]

33 minutes ago, WesternRev said:

 

OP:

 

I have just added a comparison, from the John Marston scene, in which he suits himself up.

 

The comparison is between Version 1.00, 1.09 and 1.29. 

 

Check it out everyone. 

 

 

Good one, maybe they actually fixed it, but it must have been pretty recent because I remember playing this mission somewhere around patch 1.25 and it was still blurred.

[WesternRev]

OP [Update]:

 

Updated some of the pictures, so the comparison between the pictures is more accurate [angle, lighting, beard etc.]

 

Additionally, added a few new comparisons. 

 

Edited August 20, 2021 by WesternRev

[rollschuh2282]

3 hours ago, 4lk4n4l4d4 said:

The ssao setting remains the same on both files btw, and there are more shadows casted on objects on 1.29, so i guess it's safe to say that the ambient occlusion got more refined (improved) and not downgraded.

yes and no.
they seem to have added a lot more parameters, so stuff that was likely set in the code itself isn´t visible.
we see more at the bottom how there are dozen more SSAO parameters are.

like how we can see how ssao resolution is now set to low.
so it can still be that ssao was in a higher resolution in 1.0, but got it reduced with patches.
 

bc the file has now so many more parameters, we can´t compare it 100%

[videotech_]

As a modder who has developed a few mods for Red Dead Redemption 2 with lots of knowledge of RAGE, I can say there were downgrades to some degree in later versions but it wasn't to any extent that big of a deal as people make out to be. Rockstar made some changes to Valentine's General Store, but there were some issues with the lanterns causing issues with performance back in 2018 where frames can drop below as 20 frames following the fight with Tommy during the cutscene taking place at night. However to be fair the lanterns are really taxing on performance but again it's no big deal that they were removed. I believe there's a lot of calculations the game has to make with global illumination, ambient occlusion, etc, presumably why it's so taxing. 

 

I did recently restore these lights with some modding which is available now on RDR2Mods if anyone wants them back on PC. It definitely looks better but Rockstar is that sort of company that likes to keep their single player stable much as possible so it's justifiable in my opinion. In terms of other downgrades graphically, it's hard to say... I've checked the files so many times (even @rollschuh2282) and I haven't found any evidence to suggest this. Most screenshots coming from folks seeking to show downgrades are using different times of day (and weather) and camera positions but again hard to say. Even if the game was downgraded on the console versions it's still the best looking and most alive open-world game in the industry, it blows me away all the time. While I will say the 1.00 version of the game does have a lot of benefits, such as functioning camp dialogue for warm and cold clothing judgements, improved John Marston and faster loading on Xbox Series X & PS5. 

 

[4lk4n4l4d4]

59 minutes ago, rollschuh2282 said:

yes and no.
they seem to have added a lot more parameters, so stuff that was likely set in the code itself isn´t visible.
we see more at the bottom how there are dozen more SSAO parameters are.

like how we can see how ssao resolution is now set to low.
so it can still be that ssao was in a higher resolution in 1.0, but got it reduced with patches.
 

bc the file has now so many more parameters, we can´t compare it 100%

We can compare the screenshots though, and it's obvious there that version 1.29 produces more shadows. 

 

Even if they did lower the resoluton of ssao,which i don't think they did,it still can't be called a downgrade because the game is being more accurate and casting more shadows now, it's a give and take.

[videotech_]

23 minutes ago, 4lk4n4l4d4 said:

We can compare the screenshots though, and it's obvious there that version 1.29 produces more shadows. 

 

Even if they did lower the resoluton of ssao,which i don't think they did,it still can't be called a downgrade because the game is being more accurate and casting more shadows now, it's a give and take.

I'm sorry but you're going to have to provide some screenshots with the exact time of day and weather to prove this.

[4lk4n4l4d4]

1 hour ago, VideoTech said:

As a modder who has developed a few mods for Red Dead Redemption 2 with lots of knowledge of RAGE, I can say there were downgrades to some degree in later versions but it wasn't to any extent that big of a deal as people make out to be. Rockstar made some changes to Valentine's General Store, but there were some issues with the lanterns causing issues with performance back in 2018 where frames can drop below as 20 frames following the fight with Tommy during the cutscene taking place at night. However to be fair the lanterns are really taxing on performance but again it's no big deal that they were removed. I believe there's a lot of calculations the game has to make with global illumination, ambient occlusion, etc, presumably why it's so taxing. 

 

I did recently restore these lights with some modding which is available now on RDR2Mods if anyone wants them back on PC. It definitely looks better but Rockstar is that sort of company that likes to keep their single player stable much as possible so it's justifiable in my opinion. In terms of other downgrades graphically, it's hard to say... I've checked the files so many times (even @rollschuh2282) and I haven't found any evidence to suggest this. Most screenshots coming from folks seeking to show downgrades are using different times of day (and weather) and camera positions but again hard to say. Even if the game was downgraded on the console versions it's still the best looking and most alive open-world game in the industry, it blows me away all the time. While I will say the 1.00 version of the game does have a lot of benefits, such as functioning camp dialogue for warm and cold clothing judgements, improved John Marston and faster loading on Xbox Series X & PS5. 

 

The 1.00 version also has:

-Less content, A buggy minimap, Worse horse controls, Clipping issues, disappearing camp members, a giant hole on the map (Railroad Union Comlany), buggy missions that don't progress, Worn Rare weapons, Pop-in, No photo mode, No fast travelling from camp, and other small bugs and glitches.

[videotech_]

Just now, 4lk4n4l4d4 said:

The 1.00 version also has:

-Less content, A buggy minimap, Worse horse controls, Clipping issues, disappearing camp members, a giant hole on the map (Railroad Union Comlany), buggy missions that don't progress, Worn Rare weapons, Pop-in, No photo mode, No fast travelling from camp, and other small bugs and glitches.

Correct. I wasn't denying the fact the state of 1.00 isn't great. I'd play the current version any day over the old version and I can restore stuff on my own with mods.

[4lk4n4l4d4]

2 minutes ago, VideoTech said:

I'm sorry but you're going to have to provide some screenshots with the exact time of day and weather to prove this.

Take a look at the 5th, 6th and the 8th screenshot. Focus on the painting,and the store goods.

[WesternRev]

On 8/19/2021 at 1:34 AM, VideoTech said:

I'm sorry but you're going to have to provide some screenshots with the exact time of day and weather to prove this.

Edit

 

Edited December 23, 2021 by WesternRev

[Edward RDRIII]

Did Rockstar really fix the blurriness in that cutscene of John Marston dressing up? It has been around for so long, I didn't think they would ever bother to fix it.

[WesternRev]

On 8/19/2021 at 5:15 PM, Dudu RDRII said:

Did Rockstar really fix the blurriness in that cutscene of John Marston dressing up? It has been around for so long, I didn't think they would ever bother to fix it.

Yes.

 

Edit: It seems, that the cutscene, indeed still remains blurry, but not as bad as in Version 1.09. I have used the Photo mode, in that cutscene, and apparently it adds extra sharpnesses to the picture, as users have reported. 

 

Edited October 25, 2021 by WesternRev

[Badman_]

17 hours ago, 4lk4n4l4d4 said:

The 1.00 version also has:

-Less content, A buggy minimap, Worse horse controls, Clipping issues, disappearing camp members, a giant hole on the map (Railroad Union Comlany), buggy missions that don't progress, Worn Rare weapons, Pop-in, No photo mode, No fast travelling from camp, and other small bugs and glitches.

 

The way you put it makes 1.00 look like garbage. These are minor issues and some of them might actually never happen (like camp members disappearing and missions that don't progress). I've been playing with 1.00 for a long time now and it works just fine.

 

Plus the graphics are in a 100% state and there's zero blurriness like in the John Marston suit up scene and others (I know they might have corrected it by now but the scene remained in a blurry state for a long, long time).

Edited August 19, 2021 by Wolfman_
English.

[4lk4n4l4d4]

2 hours ago, Wolfman_ said:

 

The way you put it makes 1.00 look like garbage. These are minor issues and some of them might actually never happen (like camp members disappearing and missions that don't progress). I've been playing with 1.00 for a long time now and it works just fine.

 

Plus the graphics are in a 100% state and there's zero blurriness like in the John Marston suit up scene and others (I know they might have corrected it by now but the scene remained in a blurry state for a long, long time).

The other issues i mentioned are all guaranteed to happen. Go ahead, tell me they're not if you can. 

 

The graphics are in a 100% state? This whole topic was about debunking the supposed downgrade, and now you're gonna ignore the evidence and start with that bullsh*t again?

 

And jesus christ man, how can you say that the issues im pointing out are minor issues, and then defend 1.00 because john marston looks sharper in a cutscene. (Which was appearently fixed anyway)

 

You're only one who admitted that the screenshots didn't show any sign of a downgrade being present Wolfman... please, PLEASE, listen to reason.

[Badman_]

3 hours ago, 4lk4n4l4d4 said:

The other issues i mentioned are all guaranteed to happen. Go ahead, tell me they're not if you can. 

 

The graphics are in a 100% state? This whole topic was about debunking the supposed downgrade, and now you're gonna ignore the evidence and start with that bullsh*t again?

 

And jesus christ man, how can you say that the issues im pointing out are minor issues, and then defend 1.00 because john marston looks sharper in a cutscene. (Which was appearently fixed anyway)

 

You're only one who admitted that the screenshots didn't show any sign of a downgrade being present Wolfman... please, PLEASE, listen to reason.

 

These issues can be very subjective. Some people (like me) just won't be bothered by them. I mean, I couldn't care less about the absence of photo mode or fast travelling.

 

And yes the graphics are guaranteed to be in a 100% state. This isn't the first time someone tells me it's "fixed". Like I said before, I played the game somewhere around patch 1.25 and the downgrade was still there. Different playaforms, TVs etc. The peformance may vary.

 

And it's not just the cutscene. John Marston looks much better on the 1.00 patch. He got progressively worse throught new updates.

 

At the end of the day it all goes down to personal preference. If you care about the minimap, photo mode, fast travel etc. then just update to the latest patch. If not you can keep the 1.00. It's not bad by any means.

Edited August 19, 2021 by Wolfman_
English.

[WesternRev]

On 8/20/2021 at 1:31 AM, Wolfman_ said:

 

These issues can be very subjective. Some people (like me) just won't be bothered by them. I mean, I couldn't care less about the absence of photo mode or fast travelling.

 

And yes the graphics are guaranteed to be in a 100% state. This isn't the first time someone tells me it's "fixed". Like I said before, I played the game somewhere around patch 1.25 and the downgrade was still there. Different playaforms, TVs etc. The peformance may vary.

 

And it's not just the cutscene. John Marston looks much better on the 1.00 patch. He got progressively worse throught new updates.

 

At the end of the day it all goes down to personnal preference. If you care about the minimap, photo mode, fast travel etc. then just update to the latest patch. If not you can keep the 1.00. It's not bad by any means.

Edit

 

Edited December 23, 2021 by WesternRev

[WesternRev]

OP [Update]:

 

New comparisons have been added.

[Edward RDRIII]

On 8/17/2021 at 3:52 PM, WesternRev said:

To be honest, this comparison inside the stable looks better on current patch.

[FrancisMcReary]

Let's for now assume that the graphical fidelity is back to 99% of what it is on v1.00. 
And let's also say that it was at 95% during the patches in between. 

 

Then you could argue that with the bug fixes and other general improvements the current version is preferable. 
I can live with the decreased draw distance. 

But to be 100% sure I'm going to re-visit upgraded, I want to have the following clear:

 

1: are the textures of the glass things on top of the electricity lines still high definition?
    (yes, I look at that and I'm hyper sensitive with this sh*t and no I'm not fun at parties)

 

2: is the table back at Saemus his fence post?

 

3: are the animations back to 'slow' (normal) or are they still these dumb sped up animations
     that ruin the immersion?

 

4: same fidelity of textures is not equal to same number of textures. Is there any decrease 
    to be noticed in the number of props?

 

5: Is the forestry more lively with animals now than it was the previous patches? I'll admit 
    v1.00 may a bit over the top on this regard. But it felt empty later on. The difference was 
    just too stark. 

 

6: I noticed the beard definitions are restored. That's good. Is the lighting still washed out?
    The washing out of lighting can be the result of less lighting angles. Most noticable in Arthurs 
    blue winter jacket being less deep blue. 

 

7: How is the framerate performance (in St. Denis)?

 

8: Are the ground textures still the same? 

 

9: Is there any change in loading times? (Just curious, I don't really care)
 

10: Is there still melting snow on the clothes when you're in Ambarino?

 

 

[Badman_]

Constructive criticism here.

 

The title of the topic and main discussion are "there has been no downgrade from 1.00". Wrong. There has been downgrade from 1.00 and the downgrade has been there for quite a while. It's a fact. Maybe they fixed it with patch 1.29, but that doesn't mean that there has never been any downgrade at all.

 

A more appropriate title and discussion would be: Patch 1.29 solved the downgrade situation. A direct comparison with Patch 1.00 (or something else in these terms).

Edited August 20, 2021 by Wolfman_

[WesternRev]

On 8/20/2021 at 4:09 PM, FrancisMcReary said:

Let's for now assume that the graphical fidelity is back to 99% of what it is on v1.00. 
And let's also say that it was at 95% during the patches in between. 

 

Then you could argue that with the bug fixes and other general improvements the current version is preferable. 
I can live with the decreased draw distance. 

But to be 100% sure I'm going to re-visit upgraded, I want to have the following clear:

 

1: are the textures of the glass things on top of the electricity lines still high definition?
    (yes, I look at that and I'm hyper sensitive with this sh*t and no I'm not fun at parties)

 

2: is the table back at Saemus his fence post?

 

3: are the animations back to 'slow' (normal) or are they still these dumb sped up animations
     that ruin the immersion?

 

4: same fidelity of textures is not equal to same number of textures. Is there any decrease 
    to be noticed in the number of props?

 

5: Is the forestry more lively with animals now than it was the previous patches? I'll admit 
    v1.00 may a bit over the top on this regard. But it felt empty later on. The difference was 
    just too stark. 

 

6: I noticed the beard definitions are restored. That's good. Is the lighting still washed out?
    The washing out of lighting can be the result of less lighting angles. Most noticable in Arthurs 
    blue winter jacket being less deep blue. 

 

7: How is the framerate performance (in St. Denis)?

 

8: Are the ground textures still the same? 

 

9: Is there any change in loading times? (Just curious, I don't really care)
 

10: Is there still melting snow on the clothes when you're in Ambarino?

 

 

 

1. /

 

2. Yes

 

3. Back to normal

 

4. No

 

5. /

 

6. /

 

7. Version 1.00 drops frames constantly in towns like Valentine and Saint Denis, whereas Version 1.29 seems to remain locked.

 

8. Yes

 

9. Loading times are faster in version 1.00

10. Yes

 

Edited December 24, 2021 by WesternRev

[rollschuh2282]

1 hour ago, WesternRev said:

4. Texture quality has not been altered and the files back it up.

[Version 1.00 Textures = Ultra | Version 1.29 Textures = Ultra]

i said that just bc the setting didn´t change, doesn´t mean that R* changed some under the hood stuff about texture rendering.
i also didn´t look that much into it, but they could have also replaced textures with lower resolution ones with patches.
like for example, with a PC patch a year or so back R* optimized the High texture quality and made it less ressource intensive and a bit better looking.
so who says they didn´t do the opposite technically with patches.
with reducing the quality a bit.
they can do that stuff under the hood

[rollschuh2282]

On 8/19/2021 at 6:21 PM, WesternRev said:

Yes, don’t you see the picture? It’s obvious

 

no it isn´t.
i checked it myself.
and the beard is still a blurry mess.

not fully visible in screenshots but in motion it is.
and the photomode seems to make it appear sharper.
so yeah, 1.0 gets a point here

 

for anyone that wants to check it themselve, just replay the mission: "motherhood" and play it until the final cutscene in which john speaks with geddes.
you have to fully watch it and then you will see Johns dress up scene

Edited August 20, 2021 by rollschuh2282

[WesternRev]

On 8/20/2021 at 10:20 PM, rollschuh2282 said:

no it isn´t.
i checked it myself.
and the beard is still a blurry mess.

not fully visible in screenshots but in motion it is.
and the photomode seems to make it appear sharper.
so yeah, 1.0 gets a point here

 

for anyone that wants to check it themselve, just replay the mission: "motherhood" and play it until the final cutscene in which john speaks with geddes.
you have to fully watch it and then you will see Johns dress up scene

Edit

 

Edited December 24, 2021 by WesternRev

[Edward RDRIII]

Does someone have a comparison showcasing these removed trees from Version 1.00?

[FrancisMcReary]

18 hours ago, WesternRev said:

The graphical fidelity has never been altered in any Version. Only the ambient Occlusion.

The draw distance has not been decreased. It is the exact same, as I have tested. Rather, what they did, is remove the objects [trees etc.] completely. The trees that are not visible in Version in 1.29, yet are there in Version 1.00, have been removed completely. The Draw distance is the exact same and has not been altered.

 

As to your questions:

1. Yes.

 

2. Yes.

 

3. The animations are the exact same.

 

4. Texture quality has not been altered and the files back it up.

[Version 1.00 Textures = Ultra | Version 1.29 Textures = Ultra]

 

5. It is 20 % less lively.

 

6. No, the lighting is not washed out. It looks the exact same.

 

7. Way better, Version 1.00 drops frames constantly in towns like Valentine and Saint Denis, whereas Version 1.29 remains locked.

 

8. Yes 

 

9. Yes, the loading times in Version 1.00 are faster.

10. Yes

 

Thank you for the effort you put in informing me. I'm grateful.

 

It's an eye opener for me that they just removed trees in stead of altering the draw distance, I must admit.

 

But I do want to say that removing so many trees is not something we should praise. Can you explain why animals spawned in much further away in v1. 00? Because that certainly was the case. The reticle got red from a distance the animal was yet to load in so far it was!

 

I'm willing to take your word for it when it comes to the washed out colours. At least that there has been no technical change to induce washed out colours. Simple soul as I am I do see washed out colours. Or maybe less contrast in colours. I notice it starkly compared to v1.00

What could cause this? I'm asking 'what's wrong with my perception' and don't mean to go against you.

[Red_hot_redemption]

18 hours ago, WesternRev said:

 

The draw distance has not been decreased. It is the exact same, as I have tested. Rather, what they did, is remove the objects [trees etc.] completely. The trees that are not visible in Version in 1.29, yet are there in Version 1.00, have been removed completely. The Draw distance is the exact same and has not been altered.

 

So your saying some Trees have actually been removed from the game? Not just disappearing when you get far away, but physically less trees in the area when you get up close too?

[Fidzy]

All this bitching and moaning over tiny graphical changes

 

I just want pointy tits back

Edited August 21, 2021 by Fidzy

[Darealbandicoot]

18 hours ago, WesternRev said:

What console are you playing on and at which resolution?

 

Because this scene didn’t look blurry to me in Version 1.29, on my professionally calibrated monitor. It looked exactly like the screenshot I provided. 

 

The screen is stíl super blurry even on PS5. Photo mode removes the blurryness

20 hours ago, WesternRev said:

The graphical fidelity has never been altered in any Version. Only the ambient Occlusion.

The draw distance has not been decreased. It is the exact same, as I have tested. Rather, what they did, is remove the objects [trees etc.] completely. The trees that are not visible in Version in 1.29, yet are there in Version 1.00, have been removed completely. The Draw distance is the exact same and has not been altered.

 

As to your questions:

1. Yes.

 

2. Yes.

 

3. The animations are the exact same.

 

4. Texture quality has not been altered and the files back it up.

[Version 1.00 Textures = Ultra | Version 1.29 Textures = Ultra]

 

5. It is 20 % less lively.

 

6. No, the lighting is not washed out. It looks the exact same.

 

7. Way better, Version 1.00 drops frames constantly in towns like Valentine and Saint Denis, whereas Version 1.29 remains locked.

 

8. Yes 

 

9. Yes, the loading times in Version 1.00 are faster.

10. Yes

 

I have all patches archived and the difference is night and day. The game is in a worse state than ever before in terms of bugs especially in Epilogue, as Rolls said Rockstar probably made some under the hood tweaks to quality since any version other than 1.00 or even 1.02 look inferior to what we used to have in some way or form. 

 

You are wrong about the cutscenes since Rockstar altered the time of day and even weather in pretty much all of them compared to 1.00. The added lighting IMO looks very unnatural since Micah in the dark cabin now has a very obvious light shining in his face. 

 

 

Edited August 21, 2021 by Darealbandicoot