Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    1. GTA Online

      1. Los Santos Tuners
      2. Updates
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Blood Money
      2. Frontier Pursuits
      3. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      4. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. GTA San Andreas

      1. Classic GTA SA
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    2. GTA Vice City

      1. Classic GTA VC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    3. GTA III

      1. Classic GTA III
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    2. GTA VI

    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    6. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    4. Featured Mods

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Movies & TV
      5. Music
      6. Sports
      7. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. Announcements

      1. GTANet 20th Anniversary
    2. Support

    3. Suggestions

There has been no graphical downgrade from Version 1.00 | Ultimate Comparison between 1.00 and 1.29 [Image Heavy] + New Pictures


WesternRev
 Share

Recommended Posts

OP Update: 

 

New comparisons between Version 1.00 and 1.29 will be added later on. More precisely, wardrobe comparisons. The lighting is the exact same in those. 
 

This is a good way of comparing Ambient occlusion changes and the way AO interacts with Arthur’s face. Arthur in 1.29 looks different as we all know and my theory is, that it is like this because of the altered AO, which was originally introduced in Version 1.02 [Day one Patch] aka. the patch that DigitalFoundry played RDR 2 with, for the first time and Rockstar was confident enough with to give them the game with the day one patch where they altered the AO instead of the unpatched 1.00 Version to showcase there product that they worked on for 8 years. 

 

To get back in topic, Arthur’s face looks specifically different from far away.
 

The wardrobe comparisons should be a good format to highlight these changes between both versions. 
 

Edited by WesternRev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the new comparisons between Version 1.00 and 1.29:

 

[Disclaimer: outside lighting doesn’t affect the wardrobes, because there are no windows nor any other ways of external light being able to enter the wardrobe + the shades are always placed the same, therefore this is a very accurate way of highlighting differences between both versions.]

 

F6C4F408-744E-4F8A-B45C-63AC6515FC64.gif
 

FAE63A9F-FE84-4928-9E08-F5733FE82A72.gif

 

Write your observations down below.

 

Edited by WesternRev
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, WesternRev said:

Here are the new comparisons between Version 1.00 and 1.29:

 

[Disclaimer: outside lighting doesn’t affect the wardrobes, because there are no windows nor any other ways of external light being able to enter the wardrobe + the shades are always placed the same, therefore this is a very accurate way of highlighting differences between both versions.]

 

F6C4F408-744E-4F8A-B45C-63AC6515FC64.gif
 

FAE63A9F-FE84-4928-9E08-F5733FE82A72.gif

 

Write your observations down below.

 

In the first gif 1.00 looks more "full", not sure how to decribe it, while the patched game looks dull, funnily enough in the second gif it's the opposite 1.29 looks more "full" and 1.00 looks dull

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BAGS00 said:

In the first gif 1.00 looks more "full", not sure how to decribe it, while the patched game looks dull, funnily enough in the second gif it's the opposite 1.29 looks more "full" and 1.00 looks dull


!!!Everyone Read this!!!
 

[IMPORTANT | NEW finding | PART 1 w/Images | Part 2 linked below]:


Wanna know another fact? 

 

Big publishers like DigitalFoundry, IGN and GameSpot, were given RDR 2 with the Day One Patch aka. Version 1.02.
 

How do I know this?

 

Because I have deeply analyzed all Versions [Version 1.00, 1.02 and of course 1.29], but that doesn’t matter right now, and looked for indicators to see what Version is what.

 

And I have found out that in Version 1.00, the ammo indicators is positioned high, while in Version 1.02, the ammo indicator is positioned low.


Version 1.00:

 

KqZYVuT.jpg
 

Version 1.02:

 

U05KLmW.jpg


 

Now have a look at the Game, big publishers played an week earlier ahead  of release:


 

DigitalFoundry:

 

WUMdl4k.jpg

 

IGN:

 

BmKeZ0S.jpg
 

GameSpot:

 

c0qydQr.jpg
 

All ammo indicators are positioned low. What does this mean? Exactly. They were given RDR 2 with the day one patch aka. 1.02. 
 

This means that this is the superior Version. Do you think Rockstar worked on this game for 8 Years and just to release the worse version to big publishers? No. Of course they’re gonna give the big publishers the best Version possible. Which as I have analyzed and proven just right now, is 1.02 and 1.02 is exactly like 1.29 as I have proven with animated comparison pics.

 

Therefore 1.29 is better than 1.00.

 

Part 2 ⬇️ !!!OFFICIAL CONCLUSION!!! 

 

 

 

Edited by WesternRev
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow @WesternRev

 

Absolutely incredible investigative work. I've also analyzed a ton of launch coverage from outlets myself, and while I always suspected the game shown for reviews was version 1.02, I never noticed a detail as subtle as the ammo indicator position. Amazing that you noticed that.

 

These GIFs continue to show that the game hasn't been downgraded one bit, and I actually prefer the AO that Rockstar settled on for the final release. Like I said in my comparison thread 2 years ago, the AO in 1.00 looks good, but it looks too "neat" and unnatural to me. The final AO that appeared in the day one patch (and that we still have today) looks much more natural to me and I understand why Rockstar changed it.

 

I've been wondering about this, purely for academic reasons, but what do you think 1.01 is like? I'm curious if it's more like 1.00 or 1.02

You are able to change the game to whatever version you like, correct? Have you ever thought about looking at 1.01, just out of curiosity? I'm betting it's similar to 1.00, just with some bug fixes like the jerky map being fixed etc.

Edited by daltontigerboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WesternRev said:


!!!Everyone Read this!!! [IMPORTANT | NEW finding]


Wanna know another fact? 

 

Big publishers like DigitalFoundry, IGN and GameSpot, were given RDR 2 with the Day One Patch aka. Version 1.02.
 

How do I know this?

 

Because I have deeply analyzed all Versions [Version 1.00, 1.02 and of course 1.29], but that doesn’t matter right now, and looked for indicators to see what Version is what.

 

And I have found out that in Version 1.00, the ammo indicators is positioned high, while in Version 1.02, the ammo indicator is positioned low.


Version 1.00:

 

KqZYVuT.jpg
 

Version 1.02:

 

U05KLmW.jpg


 

Now have a look at the Game, big publishers played an week earlier ahead  of release:


 

DigitalFoundry:

 

WUMdl4k.jpg

 

IGN:

 

BmKeZ0S.jpg
 

GameSpot:

 

c0qydQr.jpg
 

All ammo indicators are positioned low. What does this mean? Exactly. They were given RDR 2 with the day one patch aka. 1.02. 
 

This means that this is the superior Version. Do you think Rockstar worked on this game for 8 Years and just to release the worse version to big publishers? No. Of course they’re gonna give the big publishers the best Version possible. Which as I have analyzed and proven just right now, is 1.02 and 1.02 is exactly like 1.29 as I have proven with animated comparison pics.

 

Therefore 1.29 is better than 1.00.
 

Yeah, I think most people agree that tha day one patch didn't really messed anything up graphics wise, it just messed John up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, daltontigerboy said:

Wow @WesternRev

 

Absolutely incredible investigative work. I've also analyzed a ton of launch coverage from outlets myself, and while I always suspected the game shown for reviews was version 1.02, I never noticed a detail as subtle as the ammo indicator position. Amazing that you noticed that.

 

These GIFs continue to show that the game hasn't been downgraded one bit, and I actually prefer the AO that Rockstar settled on for the final release. Like I said in my comparison thread 2 years ago, the AO in 1.00 looks good, but it looks too "neat" and unnatural to me. The final AO that appeared in the day one patch (and that we still have today) looks much more natural to me and I understand why Rockstar changed it.

 

I've been wondering about this, purely for academic reasons, but what do you think 1.01 is like? I'm curious if it's more like 1.00 or 1.02

You are able to change the game to whatever version you like, correct? Have you ever thought about looking at 1.01, just out of curiosity? I'm betting it's similar to 1.00, just with some bug fixes like the jerky map being fixed etc.


Good that you brought 1.01 up. 

 

Unfortunately 1.01 is lost in the files so I can’t revert back to it, since it was never released to the public. 

 

I will analyze all the big publisher Reviews cutscenes in the next couple of days and compare them to 1.00 and 1.02 just like how I compared 1.02 to 1.29. 
 

I will use the console, the big publishers used so the comparison is accurate. 

 

DF & IGN has a lot of footage of the first mission in colter.

 

This is perfect since that is the most accurate way of comparing general shade placement of each version anyways.
 

This is why DF used it. 
 

The AO is probably not gonna match 100 % with any version [1.00, 1.02/1.29], but it should be closer to one Version nonetheless, and I will analyze which one it is and share it here as always.
 

General shade placement should tell us the whole story, of which Version, 1.01 is closer to [be it 1.00 or 1.02/1.29] and tell us which version is truly better, since that’s the version Rockstar gave to big publishers. 

 

Get ready. 

 

Edited by WesternRev
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

~ @Everyone READ THIS ~

 

 

OP Update [IMPORTANT| NEW finding | PART 2 w/ Images] | [PART 1 is linked down below] :

 

!!!ITS OFFICIAL!!!

 

After I posted about my huge finding earlier on in PART 1, that big publishers like DigitalFoundry, IGN and GameSpot, were given RDR 2 with the Day One Patch aka. Version 1.02., by showing indicators that reveal, which Version is which, like the HUD ammo indicator positioning and the cash indicator positioning, @daltontigerboy made an amazing suggestion, that maybe big publishers were given not 1.02, BUT an even earlier Version, that is 1.01, which in theory includes all bug fixes of 1.02 [like Arthur’s bearded lip etc.] BUT the AO of 1.00. This was a big point. 

 

This made me very curious and it was an amazing suggestion.

 

I had to investigate. 

 

And here I’am. Back again, with valuable evidence. Apparently there are not many scenes that I could find in which I could accurately compare the AO.

 

BUT…

 

There is.

 

One scene. Provided by IGN in their Review. A publisher, that was given an earlier Version, aka. 1.01, the best version for obvious reasons, stated down below and in Part 1.
 

And I have bad news for the 1.00 folk. 
 

Simply have a look at it yourself:

 

!!!LOOK AT HOSEAS COAT IN ALL COMPARISONS TO GET THE GIST!!!

 

 ——————————————————————————

Let’s start with the 1.02 to 1.29 comparison to make clear that we still have the same general AO that was originally introduced in 1.02: ->

 

9F3D3EC1-E7EC-4C24-A478-76E28FAEE5B5.gif
 

Both look as expected, IDENTICAL in general shade placement [Look at Hoseas Coat

 

 ——————————————————————————
 

Now let’s start with the 1.00 to 1.02/1.29 comparison to illustrate that general AO shade placement is completely different: ->
 

Version 1.00 & 1.02:

 

EAB5B901-9C33-4A9F-B949-53E7A7095297.gif

 

Both look as expected, completely DIFFERENT in terms of general shade placement [Look at Hoseas Coat]

 

 

Version 1.00 & 1.29:


DEF08A0D-5C8A-4788-9043-64B522641949.gif


Again, both look as expected completely DIFFERENT in terms of general shade placement [Look at Hoseas Coat]

 

 ——————————————————————————


Now with the 1.00 to 1.01 comparison to illustrate that general AO shade placement is completely different as with 1.00 to 1.02/1.29: ->

 

CCE0FBC7-3E47-425B-AC15-8737A3200DED.gif


Again, both look completely DIFFERENT in terms of general shade placement [Look at Hoseas Coat]


 ——————————————————————————

 

 

Now with the 1.01 to 1.02/1.29 comparison to show that general AO shade placement is identical: ->


Version 1.01 & 1.02:

 

94BD1D9B-21E2-4146-9C3B-681BBEC08520.gif

 

Both look IDENTICAL in general shade placement [Look at Hoseas Coat]

 

 

Version 1.01 & 1.29:

 

93F1F9EF-54E5-457B-B954-1D1082631255.gif

 

Both look IDENTICAL in general shade placement [Look at Hoseas Coat]


 ——————————————————————————


Yup. It’s official.

 

The AO in 1.01 aka. the footage of IGN, which were given an earlier Version, aka. 1.01, the best Version for obvious reasons, is as I predicted IDENTICAL to Version 1.02, the day one patch, while 1.00 looks completely out of place in general shade placement.

 

1.02/1.29 is closer to the AO, if not almost Identical, to Version 1.01. Why do I say “almost”, because as we all know, in patch 1.09 Rockstar refined the AO and we can clearly see it here in action, even compared to 1.01.

 

Look at how the light of the lamp, Hosea is holding bounces off his coat. This is the biggest indicator, that 1.01 has indeed the AO of 1.02/1.29, while 1.00 looks completely different. 1.02/1.29 looks closer to 1.01 [Hoseas Coat].

 

What does this mean? 

 

This means that 1.29 is better than 1.00, because Version 1.02 has the same AO as Version 1.29 as I proved several times and just again, and 1.01 has the same AO as 1.02/1.29, as I also just proved. 
 

And we all know that the Version, Rockstar is gonna give to all big publishers weeks earlier ahead of launch [IGN, DigitalFoundry, GamSpot] is gonna be the best Version they have to offer.
 

Do you think Rockstar worked on a game for 8 Years just to release the worse version to big publishers?

 

No.

 

They’re gonna give big publishers the best Version possible, which was 1.01 and 1.01 has the AO of 1.02 and 1.02 has the AO of 1.29.

 

It’s official now.

 

[I’ll be adding this separately to paragraph 8 later on and make it official]

 

 ——————————————————————————


> PART 1 ⬇️ to how I found out which Version is used in trailers and by big publishers like IGN, DigitalFoundry and GameSpot and why this is important: 
 

 


 

Edited by WesternRev
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awesome finds yet again, @WesternRev

 

My only question is what confirms to you that the outlet footage was from 1.01?

 

I vaguely remember reading something around the time of launch that said the 1.02 update came out a week or so before 10/26/2018, so maybe it’s indeed true that the outlets were given 1.01 to review + capture from since 1.02 wasn’t ready yet, but I’m curious how we can know this for sure.

 

Yes, even though 1.02 is known as the “day 1 patch”,  it wasn’t actually released on day 1. It’s just the version of the game that was available on day 1.

 

Like I said, I vaguely remember reading something from launch that mentions when 1.02 was released, I’ll try to find it.

 

EDIT: AHA!

 

This thread was created on 10/13/2018

 

https://amp.reddit.com/r/reddeadredemption/comments/9nt9hh/rockstar_have_uploaded_a_second_patch_for_red/

 

The 1.02 patch being uploaded this early leads me to believe that this was the version that reviewers played. The timing of it seems to make perfect sense. 
 

 

“It’s not a second patch, it’s a new version.

1.01 was 3.7GB, this one is 3.3GB

As long as it remains like this, the day one patch size is 3.3GB”

 

This is obviously reliable Rockstar reporter and leaker TezFun2, reporting the 1.02 update being available as early as 10/13/2018, nearly 2 full weeks before launch.

 

This very likely means this was the code that outlets were provided with for review. The timing of 10/13/2018 lines up with the typical timeframe outlets receive their review code for major AAA games so that they have enough time to play it and write their review, around 2 full weeks.

 

I am 99% sure that the outlets played and captured 1.02 for their reviews.

 

Edit: Hell, even in my "there is no downgrade" thread from 2 years ago, I wrote that 1.02 was from "Mid October 2018", so I knew this back then. I simply must have forgot about it over the last 2 years haha, time will do that.

 

@WesternRev those IGN review screens that you labeled "IGN 1.01", were more than likely actually 1.02 - the review just seems to have brightness cranked up a little bit vs your 1.02 screen.

Edited by daltontigerboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, daltontigerboy said:

Awesome finds yet again, @WesternRev

 

My only question is what confirms to you that the outlet footage was from 1.01?

 

I vaguely remember reading something around the time of launch that said the 1.02 update came out only a week or so before 10/26/2018, so maybe it’s indeed true that the outlets were given 1.01 to review + capture from since 1.02 wasn’t ready yet, but I’m curious how we can know this for sure.

 

Yes, even though 1.02 is known as the “day 1 patch”,  it wasn’t actually released on day 1. It’s just the version of the game that was available on day 1.

 

Like I said, I vaguely remember reading something from launch that mentions when 1.02 was released, I’ll try to find it.

 

Its just a fact, that big publishers were given Version 1.01. Big review publishers were also testers of bugs and etc. They got paid to do so from Rockstar. It’s not like there a 3 people working at IGN etc. They played the game and reported bugs and etc.

 

Rockstar then fixed some of the bugs etc., big review publishers reported, finally turning 1.01 into 1.02. 
 

That’s why, we, the public, never got Version 1.01, but Version 1.02. A Version with “Last Minute Tweaks” with a few more bug fixes, that were reported by early testers aka big review publishers.
 

https://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/article/75o941131a271o/Get-Ready-for-Red-Dead-Redemption-2?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=rdr2-getready-10232018&utm_content=newswire

 

“As is common for a game of this size and scope, there will be a downloadable title update addressing a number of last minute tweaks, bugs and fixes.“ - Rockstargames 


Last minute tweaks, is the key phrase. These last minute tweaks are as I said, what turned Version 1.01 [the version big review publishers were given days/weeks before] into 1.02.

 

The altered AO stayed stayed the same all along. The 1.00 AO was never meant for the public. It’s obsolete.

 

The gameplay footage we saw from IGN, DigitalFoundry and GameSpot, was before the “last minute” day one patch 1.02.

 

And the gameplay footage they analyzed and used, were as I proved, definitely not Version 1.00 making Version 1.01 and 1.02 the only options + ammo indicator/money indicator HUD.
 

Version 1.00 is completely obsolete and out of the discussion. That’s for sure.
 

Edited by WesternRev
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, WesternRev said:

 

Its just a fact, that big publishers were given Version 1.01. Big review publishers were also testers of bugs and etc. They got paid to do so from Rockstar. It’s not like there a 3 people working at IGN etc. They played the game and reported bugs and etc.

 

Rockstar then fixed some of the bugs etc., big review publishers reported, finally turning 1.01 into 1.02. 
 

That’s why, we, the public, never got Version 1.01, but Version 1.02. A Version with “Last Minute Tweaks” with a few more bug fixes, that were reported by early testers aka big review publishers.
 

https://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/article/75o941131a271o/Get-Ready-for-Red-Dead-Redemption-2?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=rdr2-getready-10232018&utm_content=newswire

 

“As is common for a game of this size and scope, there will be a downloadable title update addressing a number of last minute tweaks, bugs and fixes.“ - Rockstargames 


Last minute tweaks, is the key phrase. These last minute tweaks are as I said, what turned Version 1.01 [the version big review publishers were given days/weeks before] into 1.02.

 

The altered AO stayed stayed the same all along. The 1.00 AO was never meant for the public. It’s obsolete.

 

The gameplay footage we saw from IGN, DigitalFoundry and GameSpot, was before the “last minute” day one patch 1.02.

 

And the gameplay footage they analyzed and used, were as I proved, definitely not Version 1.00 making Version 1.01 and 1.02 the only options + ammo indicator/money indicator HUD.
 

Version 1.00 is completely obsolete and out of the discussion. That’s for sure.
 

Take a look at my edits from my last post. I believe when Rockstar was talking about the "last minute tweaks", they mean last minute before the game was sent in for review aka mid-October. The "last minute tweaks" were version 1.02 which was provided to reviewers on-or-around 10/13/2018.

 

At this point I doubt the public has ever seen footage of 1.01

 

Like I implied in an earlier post on this page, 1.01 might have just been a patch that fixed a lot of bugs and issues present on the pressed-disc gold version. The gold-master-disc version aka 1.00 was likely finalized in September 2018.

 

There is a lot of time between the game going gold (1.00) and the review code being sent out (~10/13/2018)

 

1.01 was created somewhere in between there, possibly late September or early October, but Rockstar still found bugs and things they needed to fix before submitting the game to outlets for review, thus 1.02 was created "last minute" before handing the game over for review, which was in mid October (~10/13/2018).

 

1.01 was likely never seen by anyone outside of Rockstar, because 1.02 containing last minute major bug fixes and tweaks was the code given to outlets for review.

 

I hope this makes sense.

Edited by daltontigerboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, daltontigerboy said:

Take a look at my edits from my last post. I believe when Rockstar was talking about the "last minute tweaks", they mean last minute before the game was sent in for review aka mid-October. The "last minute tweaks" were version 1.02 which was provided to reviewers on (or possibly even before) 10/13/2018.

 

At this point I doubt the public has ever seen footage of 1.01


Edit: I just saw your edit and it makes sense. Thank you for the valuable info. Very Good observation.
 

I mean we kinda did see it though.
 

The footage DigitalFoundry shows us and analyzed for example, is footage of the game they got, with the included Version in that time.
 

Like, as soon as they got the game from Rockstar, they started analyzing it and Rockstar gave it to “them”, DF that is,  exactly for that reason, to showcase the good performance of the game and how they managed to make this game work on these consoles.
 

They can’t hide these things from DigitalFoundry. Rockstar has literally given them even an copy of the game to analyze everything. They were confident and prepared. So obviously, they gave them and all publishers the best version they got at that time, and that version was for sure and 100 % not 1.00, as I proved [HUD indicators, AO].
 

So this already tells us everything we need to know about which version is even in the discussion. Version 1.00 isn’t. 
 

But back to what I said.

 

Just look at the way they tested the game. A 30 minute length Review of all consoles:

 


 +
 

 

another 30 minute Tech analysis.
 

All released at release of RDR 2. All this testing can surely not be done in a short time, even with a team. Meaning ALL Footage they showed in these Videos are footage since they got the game. Immediately to work. 
 

Also, it doesn’t really matter what Version they “exactly” used if you still don’t believe me.
 

Be it 1.01 or 1.02.

 

If the footage provided from DF, IGN, GameSpot, looks like the AO we got on Day one, and it does, + other indicators such as the ammo positioning + money positioning + same general AO shades placement, than that’s all we need to know.

 

That is, knowing that 1.00 is completely out of the picture, therefore leaving 1.02/1.29 with our only option, because that’s the version that also coincidentally literally matches the AO and other indicators, etc. of the early review footages DF, IGN, GameSpot provided. 

This makes 1.02/1.29 superior to 1.00.

 

Edited by WesternRev
Wrong Video
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, WesternRev said:


I mean we kinda did see it though.
 

The footage DigitalFoundry shows us  and analyzed for example, is footage of the game they got, with the included Version in that time.
 

Like, as soon as they got the game from Rockstar, they started analyzing it and Rockstar gave it to “them”, DF that is,  exactly for that reason, to showcase the good performance of the game and how they managed to make this game work on these consoles.
 

They can’t hide these things from DigitalFoundry. Rockstar has literally given them even an copy of the game to analyze everything. They were confident and prepared. So obviously, they gave them and all publishers the best version they got at that time, and that version was for sure and 100 % not 1.00, as I proved [HUD indicators, AO].
 

So this already tells us everything we need to know about which version is even in the discussion. Version 1.00 isn’t. 
 

But back to what I said.

 

Just look at the way they tested the game. A 30 minute length Review of all consoles:

 


 +
 

 

another 30 minute Tech analysis.
 

All released at release of RDR 2. All this testing can surely not be done in a short time, even with a team. Meaning ALL Footage they showed in these Videos are footage since they got the game. Immediately to work. 
 

Also, it doesn’t really matter what Version they “exactly” used if you still don’t believe me.
 

Be it 1.01 or 1.02.

 

If the footage provided from DF, IGN, GameSpot, looks like the AO we got on Day one, and it does, + other indicators such as the ammo positioning + money positioning + same general AO shades placement, than that’s all we need to know.

 

That is, knowing that 1.00 is completely out of the picture, therefore leaving 1.29 with our only option, because that’s the version that also coincidentally literally matches the AO and other indicators, etc. of the early review footages DF, IGN, GameSpot provided. 
 

I agree with everything you are saying.

 

I'm just clarifying that I don't believe 1.01 was ever seen by anyone outside of Rockstar.

 

Yes, 1.00 is the inferior version, that's why Rockstar changed the AO and fixed many bugs between the game going gold and it being submitted for review. And the review code they submitted, looking at all of the facts, points to being 1.02

 

I know it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, but yesterday I just became curious about 1.01, but now after looking back at the timeline of things, I realize it's very likely that nobody ever actually saw or had access to that version of the game outside of Rockstar. 1.01 was simply their first fixes of the gold master disc (1.00) to eliminate the first wave of bugs and glitches that they knew existed/discovered in 1.00

 

Sorry to cause this whole tangent by bringing up 1.01 lol.

 

Long story short:

 

1.00 - gold master version of the game pressed to disc, likely in early September or thereabouts. Glitchy, buggy as hell, has the old style AO that Rockstar decided against

1.01 - this is all my speculation but it seems very likely - these were fixes to many of the bugs and glitches of the gold master version that Rockstar were/became aware of. This was the first wave of major bug fixes

1.02 - last minute fixes and tweaks before submitting the game to all outlets for review in mid-October. This is the version we see in all the reviews and launch coverage

 

We don't know which version Rockstar changed the AO, and we probably never will. All that matters is that they changed it because they preferred it over the original implementation we see in 1.00

Edited by daltontigerboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, daltontigerboy said:

I agree with everything you are saying.

 

I'm just clarifying that I don't believe 1.01 was ever seen by anyone outside of Rockstar.

 

Yes, 1.00 is the inferior version, that's why Rockstar changed the AO before submitting the game for review. And the review code they submitted, looking at all of the facts, seems highly likely to be 1.02

 

I know it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, but yesterday I just became curious about 1.01, but now after looking back at the timeline of things, I realize that nobody ever actually saw or had access to that version of the game outside of Rockstar. 1.01 was simply their first fixes of the gold master disc (1.00) to eliminate the first wave of bugs and glitches that they discovered internally after testing 1.00

 

Sorry to cause this whole tangent by bringing up 1.01 lol.

 

Long story short:

 

1.00 - gold master version of the game pressed to disc, likely in early September or thereabouts. Glitchy, buggy as hell, has the old style AO that Rockstar decided against

1.01 - this is all my speculation but it seems very likely - these were fixes to many of the bugs and glitches of the gold master version that Rockstar were/became aware of with the gold master disc version

1.02 - last minute fixes and tweaks before submitting the game to all outlets for review. This is the version we see in all the reviews and launch coverage

 

We don't know which version Rockstar changed the AO, and we probably never will. All that matters is that they changed it because they preferred it over the original implementation.


I absolutely agree with everything you just said.
 

I like the thought provoking questions you bring in every single time. Makes me triple check my information + refine my arguments to even more solid arguments with even less fallacies.

 

Edited by WesternRev
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WesternRev said:


I absolutely agree with everything you just said.
 

I like the thought provoking questions you bring in every single time. Makes me triple check my information + refine my arguments to even more solid arguments with even less fallacies.

 

Haha thank you, but I feel like I'm just being a bit too obsessive and curious more than thought provoking, as kindly as you put it.

 

Now that we've concluded that conversation, I'm not even sure where to move onto now? You have already provided all the evidence anyone will ever need that the game has not been downgraded, and in fact looks better than 1.00 in most instances. I'm really not sure what else needs to be said! I think our work (mostly yours) is done here!

 

Thanks a lot for putting all this time and effort into this investigation and your comparisons. They have been so valuable and they are irrefutable. All of the posters here who have been crying over placebo downgrades over the last 3 years look like clowns. I proved this 2 years ago, and you've proved it a bunch here in the last few months. Great work, sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, daltontigerboy said:

Haha thank you, but I feel like I'm just being a bit too obsessive and curious more than thought provoking, as kindly as you put it.

 

Now that we've concluded that conversation, I'm not even sure where to move onto now? You have already provided all the evidence anyone will ever need that the game has not been downgraded, and in fact looks better than 1.00 in most instances. I'm really not sure what else needs to be said! I think our work (mostly yours) is done here!

 

Thanks a lot for putting all this time and effort into this investigation and your comparisons. They have been so valuable and they are irrefutable. All of the posters here who have been crying over placebo downgrades over the last 3 years look like clowns. I proved this 2 years ago, and you've proved it a bunch here in the last few months. Great work, sir.


I’am done for now. There is really nothing to cover or prove anymore.

 

I’am very much at peace with myself now, that I have finally discovered which version is superior after all this work.

 

That is 1.29.

 

The discovery was made after weeks/months of objective/unbiased investigation. You all witnessed the progression of my comparisons/findings here in this thread.

 

From inaccurate 1.00 to 1.29 comparisons, to like for like animated GIFs on multiple Versions [1.00, 1.01*, 1.02, 1.29] + findings that make discerning Versions from each other easy as cake [ammo indicator positioning, money indicator positioning, general AO shades placement].

 

From going back and forth with biased people, saying this is better in 1.29, this is better in 1.00 etc., to just looking at what Rockstar used in their trailers [Part 2 Gameplay Trailer] + the Version that was sent to big review publishers. 
 

The Version that is being used in both of these scenarios stated above, is clearly and objectively the better Version. 
 

And that version was 1.02, which looks identical to the version we have this day [general AO shade placement],
 

Version 1.29.
 

I would say, that my work/our work, because the thread you originally made is the foundation to all of this [layout, text], is pretty much done here.

 

It was a great time indeed and I wish you best of luck. 

 

🤝

 

Edited by WesternRev
  • Like 1
  • Best Bru 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, WesternRev said:


I’am done for now. There is really nothing to cover or prove anymore.

 

I’am very much at peace with myself now, that I have finally discovered which version is superior after all this work.

 

That is 1.29.

 

The discovery was made after weeks/months of objective/unbiased investigation. You all witnessed the progression of my comparisons/findings here in this thread.

 

From inaccurate 1.00 to 1.29 comparisons, to like for like animated GIFs on multiple Versions [1.00, 1.01*, 1.02, 1.29] + findings that make discerning Versions from each other easy as cake [ammo indicator positioning, money indicator positioning, general AO shades placement].

 

From going back and forth with biased people, saying this is better in 1.29, this is better in 1.00 etc., to just looking at what Rockstar used in their trailers [Part 2 Gameplay Trailer] + the Version that was sent to big review publishers. 
 

The Version that is being used in both of these scenarios stated above, is clearly and objectively the better Version. 
 

And that version was 1.02, which looks identical to the version we have this day [general AO shade placement],
 

Version 1.29.
 

I would say, that my work/our work, because the thread you originally made is the foundation to all of this [layout, text], is pretty much done here.

 

It was a great time indeed and I wish you best of luck. 

 

🤝

 

U3OCjOQ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2021 at 2:58 PM, WesternRev said:

the shades are always placed the same, therefore this is a very accurate way of highlighting differences between both versions

not technically.
they edited and played around with values for a lot of things in the timecycle modifiers.
like for some 1.0 even has more values than the latest patch.

and for some the latest patch has many more values.
so of course it will look different.

here valentine for example.
they added 50 new values to that one, which means they change the look of it in the latest patch more.
so lighting isn´t the same anymore

old:

Spoiler

<modifier name="val_genstore_int_dressingroom" description="" numMods="52" userFlags="0">
    <light_artificial_int_up_col_r>1.000 1.000</light_artificial_int_up_col_r>
    <light_artificial_int_up_col_g>0.678 1.000</light_artificial_int_up_col_g>
    <light_artificial_int_up_col_b>0.427 1.000</light_artificial_int_up_col_b>
    <light_artificial_int_up_intensity>0.100 0.000</light_artificial_int_up_intensity>
    <postfx_exposure_max>6.500 0.000</postfx_exposure_max>
    <postfx_exposure_lowlights_percent>0.350 0.000</postfx_exposure_lowlights_percent>
    <dir_shadow_distance_multiplier>0.300 0.000</dir_shadow_distance_multiplier>
    <fog_start>5.000 5000.000</fog_start>
    <temperature_target>22.000 0.000</temperature_target>
    <temperature_flatten>0.850 0.000</temperature_flatten>
    <lightanim_wind>0.000 0.000</lightanim_wind>
    <lightanim_damp>0.000 0.000</lightanim_damp>
    <light_artificial_int_down_intensity>0.100 0.000</light_artificial_int_down_intensity>
    <light_artificial_int_down_col_r>1.000 1.000</light_artificial_int_down_col_r>
    <light_artificial_int_down_col_g>0.780 1.000</light_artificial_int_down_col_g>
    <light_artificial_int_down_col_b>0.592 1.000</light_artificial_int_down_col_b>
    <postfx_grad_top_col_mult>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_top_col_mult>
    <postfx_grad_middle_col_mult>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_middle_col_mult>
    <postfx_grad_bottom_col_mult>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_bottom_col_mult>
    <postfx_grad_bottom_col_r>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_bottom_col_r>
    <postfx_grad_bottom_col_g>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_bottom_col_g>
    <postfx_grad_bottom_col_b>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_bottom_col_b>
    <postfx_grad_middle_col_r>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_middle_col_r>
    <postfx_grad_middle_col_g>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_middle_col_g>
    <postfx_grad_middle_col_b>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_middle_col_b>
    <postfx_grad_top_col_r>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_top_col_r>
    <postfx_grad_top_col_g>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_top_col_g>
    <postfx_grad_top_col_b>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_top_col_b>
    <postfx_exposure>1.000 0.000</postfx_exposure>
    <postfx_intensity_bloom>0.100 0.000</postfx_intensity_bloom>
    <postfx_exposure_perpixel_amount>0.200 0.000</postfx_exposure_perpixel_amount>
    <postfx_exposure_cubemap_mult_close_to_portals>1.000 0.000</postfx_exposure_cubemap_mult_close_to_portals>
    <postfx_exposure_cubemap_amount>0.300 0.000</postfx_exposure_cubemap_amount>
    <ped_light0_col_r>1.000 1.000</ped_light0_col_r>
    <ped_light0_col_g>0.875 1.000</ped_light0_col_g>
    <ped_light0_col_b>0.529 1.000</ped_light0_col_b>
    <ped_light0_mult>5.000 0.000</ped_light0_mult>
    <ped_light1_col_r>1.000 1.000</ped_light1_col_r>
    <ped_light1_col_g>0.835 1.000</ped_light1_col_g>
    <ped_light1_col_b>0.537 1.000</ped_light1_col_b>
    <ped_light1_mult>5.000 0.000</ped_light1_mult>
    <ped_light2_col_r>1.000 1.000</ped_light2_col_r>
    <ped_light2_col_g>0.812 1.000</ped_light2_col_g>
    <ped_light2_col_b>0.518 1.000</ped_light2_col_b>
    <ped_light2_mult>2.000 0.000</ped_light2_mult>
    <ped_light3_col_r>1.000 1.000</ped_light3_col_r>
    <ped_light3_col_g>0.780 1.000</ped_light3_col_g>
    <ped_light3_col_b>0.518 1.000</ped_light3_col_b>
    <ped_light3_mult>2.000 0.000</ped_light3_mult>
    <indirect_light_multiplier>1.000 0.000</indirect_light_multiplier>
    <ssao_inten>4.000 0.000</ssao_inten>
    <ssao_dominant_dir_strength>0.000 0.000</ssao_dominant_dir_strength>
  </modifier>

 

latest patch:

Spoiler

<modifier name="val_genstore_int_dressingroom" description="" numMods="102" userFlags="0">
    <light_artificial_int_up_col_r>1.000 1.000</light_artificial_int_up_col_r>
    <light_artificial_int_up_col_g>0.678 1.000</light_artificial_int_up_col_g>
    <light_artificial_int_up_col_b>0.427 1.000</light_artificial_int_up_col_b>
    <light_artificial_int_up_intensity>0.100 0.000</light_artificial_int_up_intensity>
    <postfx_exposure_max>6.500 0.000</postfx_exposure_max>
    <postfx_exposure_lowlights_percent>0.300 0.000</postfx_exposure_lowlights_percent>
    <dir_shadow_distance_multiplier>0.300 0.000</dir_shadow_distance_multiplier>
    <fog_start>5.000 5000.000</fog_start>
    <temperature_target>22.000 0.000</temperature_target>
    <temperature_flatten>1.000 0.000</temperature_flatten>
    <lightanim_wind>0.000 0.000</lightanim_wind>
    <lightanim_damp>0.000 0.000</lightanim_damp>
    <light_artificial_int_down_intensity>0.100 0.000</light_artificial_int_down_intensity>
    <light_artificial_int_down_col_r>1.000 1.000</light_artificial_int_down_col_r>
    <light_artificial_int_down_col_g>0.780 1.000</light_artificial_int_down_col_g>
    <light_artificial_int_down_col_b>0.592 1.000</light_artificial_int_down_col_b>
    <postfx_grad_top_col_mult>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_top_col_mult>
    <postfx_grad_middle_col_mult>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_middle_col_mult>
    <postfx_grad_bottom_col_mult>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_bottom_col_mult>
    <postfx_grad_bottom_col_r>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_bottom_col_r>
    <postfx_grad_bottom_col_g>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_bottom_col_g>
    <postfx_grad_bottom_col_b>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_bottom_col_b>
    <postfx_grad_middle_col_r>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_middle_col_r>
    <postfx_grad_middle_col_g>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_middle_col_g>
    <postfx_grad_middle_col_b>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_middle_col_b>
    <postfx_grad_top_col_r>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_top_col_r>
    <postfx_grad_top_col_g>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_top_col_g>
    <postfx_grad_top_col_b>1.000 0.000</postfx_grad_top_col_b>
    <postfx_intensity_bloom>0.100 0.000</postfx_intensity_bloom>
    <postfx_exposure_perpixel_amount>0.300 0.000</postfx_exposure_perpixel_amount>
    <postfx_exposure_cubemap_mult_close_to_portals>1.000 0.000</postfx_exposure_cubemap_mult_close_to_portals>
    <postfx_exposure_cubemap_amount>0.000 0.000</postfx_exposure_cubemap_amount>
    <ped_light1_col_r>1.000 1.000</ped_light1_col_r>
    <ped_light1_col_g>0.835 1.000</ped_light1_col_g>
    <ped_light1_col_b>0.537 1.000</ped_light1_col_b>
    <ped_light1_mult>60.000 1.000</ped_light1_mult>
    <ped_light2_col_r>1.000 1.000</ped_light2_col_r>
    <ped_light2_col_g>0.812 1.000</ped_light2_col_g>
    <ped_light2_col_b>0.518 1.000</ped_light2_col_b>
    <ped_light2_mult>0.000 1.000</ped_light2_mult>
    <ped_light3_col_r>1.000 1.000</ped_light3_col_r>
    <ped_light3_col_g>0.780 1.000</ped_light3_col_g>
    <ped_light3_col_b>0.518 1.000</ped_light3_col_b>
    <ped_light3_mult>0.000 1.000</ped_light3_mult>
    <indirect_light_multiplier>1.000 0.000</indirect_light_multiplier>
    <ssao_dominant_dir_strength>0.000 0.000</ssao_dominant_dir_strength>
    <ssao_inten>4.000 0.000</ssao_inten>
    <postfx_vignette_tint_r>1.000 0.000</postfx_vignette_tint_r>
    <postfx_vignette_tint_g>1.000 0.000</postfx_vignette_tint_g>
    <postfx_vignette_tint_b>1.000 0.000</postfx_vignette_tint_b>
    <ambient_sky_intensity>1.000 0.000</ambient_sky_intensity>
    <ambient_bounce_intensity>1.000 0.000</ambient_bounce_intensity>
    <postfx_scotopic_weight_bias>-0.150 0.000</postfx_scotopic_weight_bias>
    <postfx_scotopic_col_r>0.380 0.000</postfx_scotopic_col_r>
    <postfx_scotopic_col_g>0.541 0.000</postfx_scotopic_col_g>
    <postfx_scotopic_col_b>1.000 0.000</postfx_scotopic_col_b>
    <postfx_scotopic_weight_scale>0.300 0.000</postfx_scotopic_weight_scale>
    <postfx_scotopic_blue_shift_intensity>0.698 0.000</postfx_scotopic_blue_shift_intensity>
    <sky_scattering_sun_col_r>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_sun_col_r>
    <sky_scattering_sun_col_g>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_sun_col_g>
    <sky_scattering_sun_col_b>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_sun_col_b>
    <sky_scattering_sky_col_r>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_sky_col_r>
    <sky_scattering_sky_col_g>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_sky_col_g>
    <sky_scattering_sky_col_b>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_sky_col_b>
    <sky_scattering_moon_col_r>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_moon_col_r>
    <sky_scattering_moon_col_g>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_moon_col_g>
    <sky_scattering_moon_col_b>1.000 0.000</sky_scattering_moon_col_b>
    <local_atmosphere_sky_col_r>1.000 1.000</local_atmosphere_sky_col_r>
    <local_atmosphere_sky_col_g>1.000 1.000</local_atmosphere_sky_col_g>
    <local_atmosphere_sky_col_b>1.000 1.000</local_atmosphere_sky_col_b>
    <local_atmosphere_direct_light_color_r>1.000 0.000</local_atmosphere_direct_light_color_r>
    <local_atmosphere_direct_light_color_g>1.000 0.000</local_atmosphere_direct_light_color_g>
    <local_atmosphere_direct_light_color_b>1.000 0.000</local_atmosphere_direct_light_color_b>
    <light_dir_col_r>1.000 1.000</light_dir_col_r>
    <light_dir_col_g>1.000 1.000</light_dir_col_g>
    <light_dir_col_b>1.000 1.000</light_dir_col_b>
    <galaxy_light_dir_col_r>1.000 1.000</galaxy_light_dir_col_r>
    <galaxy_light_dir_col_g>1.000 1.000</galaxy_light_dir_col_g>
    <galaxy_light_dir_col_b>1.000 1.000</galaxy_light_dir_col_b>
    <ambient_sky_color_mult_r>1.000 1.000</ambient_sky_color_mult_r>
    <ambient_sky_color_mult_g>1.000 1.000</ambient_sky_color_mult_g>
    <ambient_sky_color_mult_b>1.000 1.000</ambient_sky_color_mult_b>
    <ambient_bounce_local_lights_intensity>1.000 0.000</ambient_bounce_local_lights_intensity>
    <ambient_sh_window>1000.000 0.000</ambient_sh_window>
    <humidity_override>1.000 0.000</humidity_override>
    <himidity_override_intensity>0.000 0.000</himidity_override_intensity>
    <postfx_exposure_highlights_percent>0.200 0.000</postfx_exposure_highlights_percent>
    <ped_light0_mult>100.000 1.000</ped_light0_mult>
    <wind_speed_mult>0.000 0.000</wind_speed_mult>
    <ped_light1_dir_x>0.376 1.000</ped_light1_dir_x>
    <ped_light1_dir_z>-0.214 1.000</ped_light1_dir_z>
    <postfx_vignette_axis_scale_x>0.423 0.000</postfx_vignette_axis_scale_x>
    <postfx_exposure>0.500 0.000</postfx_exposure>
    <lut_tc_strength_mult>0.000 0.000</lut_tc_strength_mult>
    <postfx_weather_color_correction>0.000 0.000</postfx_weather_color_correction>
    <ped_light0_col_r>0.875 1.000</ped_light0_col_r>
    <ped_light0_col_g>0.714 1.000</ped_light0_col_g>
    <ped_light0_col_b>0.435 1.000</ped_light0_col_b>
    <postfx_vignette_inner_radius>1.070 0.000</postfx_vignette_inner_radius>
    <postfx_vignette_axis_scale_y>1.000 0.000</postfx_vignette_axis_scale_y>
    <postfx_vignette_intensity>0.400 0.000</postfx_vignette_intensity>
    <postfx_desaturation>1.000 0.000</postfx_desaturation>
  </modifier>

at num mods you can see how many modifiers are listed for that modifier.
and they even changed cloudy weather a bit for example.
which changing some values and added some.
and the high pressure one (not sure which weather that one is exactly)

and reduced the SSAO intensity in that one

so it is hard to compare, since if they reduced the AO in the game, they can just bump up the multiplier in the timecycle file.
and i don´t think missions that start through mission replay and begin as cutscenes don´t always have the same weather.
like one of your shots looks like it is cloudy on 1.0 and sunny on the latest patch.
 

Edited by rollschuh2282
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, rollschuh2282 said:

and i don´t think missions that start through mission replay and begin as cutscenes don´t always have the same weather.
like one of your shots looks like it is cloudy on 1.0 and sunny on the latest patch.


EDIT ADDED DOWN BELOW: 

 

Yes, you’re right, some of the replay missions, even though they start with a cutscene, still have different weather.
 

Those are not really supposed to be taken at face value though. Rather, general differences in the overall ambiance.

 

1.00 has a “gold tint“ + smooth/gradient look to it, while 1.29 looks more “prominent“. This is the general conclusion.

 

14 hours ago, rollschuh2282 said:

not technically.
they edited and played around with values for a lot of things in the timecycle modifiers.
like for some 1.0 even has more values than the latest patch.

and for some the latest patch has many more values.
so of course it will look different.

here valentine for example.
they added 50 new values to that one, which means they change the look of it in the latest patch more.
so lighting isn´t the same anymore


All this doesn’t really doesn’t matter though. You have to look at the bigger picture. 
 

That is, that all footage of big review publishers + trailer footage looks more like Version 1.02/1.29, while 1.00 is completely out of the discussion.

 

Like, one thing is for sure, and that is, that big review publishers, were not given 1.00, making 1.00 obsolete + the last trailer wasn’t shot in 1.00 (Gameplay trailer Part 2) (ammo indicator, money indicator, map size, Micah’s hair twisted instead of flat)

 

So, 1.00 is not even in the discussion anymore.
 

If it is the superior version, why haven’t they given them Version 1.00 + why didn’t they shoot the trailer in 1.00, if it’s superior? 
 

Because it isn’t.


+
 

1.02/1.29 has a better overall Ambient occlusion implementation, while the effect of it is reduced.

 

1.00 has a worse overall Ambient occlusion implementation, while the effect of it is stronger. 

 

How do I know that 1.02/1.29 has a lessened effect of AO? 

 

“Lighting changes were originally made in the Day One Patch (1.02) to prevent framerate issues.“ - Rockstar

 

So, what is more important?

 

Overall Ambient occlusion implementation or the effect it? 

 

It’s the former. Why? 

 

Look at what Rockstar did, to find out. 

 

They’ve given all big review publishers the Version of RDR2, that has the AO implementation of Version 1.02. and used 1.02 in the Part 2 Gameplay trailer.

 

Therefore, better overall Ambient occlusion implementation/effect reduced [1.02], trumps, worse overall Ambient occlusion implementation/effect stronger [1.00].

 

Else, they would give big review publishers Version 1.00, as I said, and only use 1.00 in the Part 2 Gameplay Trailer.

 

But they haven’t. Because 1.00 is simply obsolete. 

+
 

EDIT:

 

> 1.00 has different values. 1.29 has different values. Therefore none is the same.

 

That’s your argument. 

 

Not to forget that, that those are wardrobe values. Might as well provide values of the barber in Valentine etc. 

 

Like, of course the values in those are changed more often, since those are areas small areas in which you have to dress your character and groom yourself.

 

Remember, how dark 1.00 looks in the barber chair, while 1.02 looks bright? 


Exactly.


And of course the values are different. They look different. So even by your argument, cutscene values are the same then. Why? Because they look the same. 


But all that doesn’t really matter. 
 

Back to the point.

 

1.00 has different values. 1.29 has different values, therefore none is the same. 

 

That’s your argument. 

 

But, you seem to have forgotten, that still, 1.29, looks exactly like IGNs footage in terms of AO + DF, GamesSpot footage, while 1.00 looks completely different, despite “different” values further solidifying my finding.

 

Next up, the ammo indicator and other HUD indicators shown in all outlet footage, are exactly like from 1.02. And 1.02 looks exactly like 1.29. 

 

All this, is not a coincidence. 

 

It’s simple. 

 

1.00 is the version, that is NOT used/shown anywhere, while 1.02/1.29 coincidentally matches all outlet footage to a T (from AO to HUD indicators).

 

1.00 is simply obsolete and 1.02/1.29 is superior. <


Simply put, 1.00 doesn’t match any outlet footage at all. From HUD indicators to AO. 1.02 matches all outlet footage, as 1.29 does, aside HUD positioning, which was change recently again. -

 

Making 1.02/1.29 superior.

 

No argument can be made from here on anymore from the 1.00 folk. 

 

/thread

 

Edited by WesternRev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.