Support NeoGAF

[Loudninja]

Umm yeah not many out there.

Attack of the Fanboy 8/10

Like just about any remaster or re-release you have to ask yourself if this game needed to be remade. Dishonored didn’t feel like a game that was held back by old hardware. The unique art style made up for any shortcomings in resolution. That said, Dishonored on the PlayStation 4 looks a lot sharper than its predecessor. And for anyone that doesn’t have a gaming PC, Dishonored: Definitive Edition is the best way to experience it. Visuals are notably cleaner in this version of the game, but it doesn’t necessarily feel like it’s pressing the new hardware to its absolute limits. The significant changes in Dishonored: Definitive Edition really feel like they amount to a bump in resolution and that’s about it. Like the graphics, the gameplay in Dishonored wasn’t lacking and the Definitive version isn’t either. Frame rates look like they’re locked in at 30 fps for the console re-release, so there’s not a significant jump there either. But there are a couple of little things about the game that has changed on the PS4 version. Like the use of the Dualshock 4 to whisper sweet nothings out of the controller’s speaker when using an item in the game.

http://attackofthefanboy.com/reviews/dishonored-definitive-edition-review/

Gamekult 8/10
http://www.gamekult.com/jeux/test-dishonored-definitive-edition-SU3050483041t.html#xbo

Playstation Universe 8/10

Well, apart from packaging everything up in a nice bow it offers nothing but a graphical touch up. It’s a port rather than a remaster and sadly that means it doesn’t run any better than it did before (still 30fps if you care for such things). Then there are the loading times, oh my, the loading times are aggravating. At times they seem longer than before and in any case they are always far too long for what the game is. The other gripe is a less problematic one in my case (though I’ve heard other have it worse) in that there have been minor glitches and a couple of occasions where screen-tearing occurred, but they seemed like inconsequential isolated incidents in terms of the overall playtime, but that may change from user-to-user so pay heed. So basically if you own all this on previous gen consoles or PC then forget about grabbing this for now unless you absolutely must have a current generation compendium of it or your old copy gets murdered or something. It doesn’t stop it being a fantastic game, but the lack of improvements where it could have so easily been improved make this less than essential for all but the newcomers and the die-hards.

http://www.psu.com/review/27982/Dishonored--Definitive-Edition-PS4-Review-

3DJuegos 7.5
http://www.3djuegos.com/juegos/analisis/22621/0/dishonored-definitive-edition/

IGN 8.0

Dishonored was a little behind the curve on lighting, lip syncing, some of its texture work and a few other bits and pieces in 2012 and this release does nothing to rectify any of that. Nor does it deliver 60 frames per second gameplay, which is a huge missed opportunity. The Definitive Edition’s load times are also a lot longer than on last gen console and PC.

Stylish art
+Open gameplay
+Distinct world

– Load times
– No new improvements

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/08...ium=PS4&utm_content=2&utm_campaign=Coverstory

 

[Mushroomer25]

I look forward to getting it on Games with Gold in about a year, right before Dishonored 2 hits.

 

[Omega Kirby]

Stealth release

Stealth reviews


What a stealthy game.

 

[Surface of Me]

Someone told me it's Medium PC settings, which is disappointing if true. Most modern PCs should run it pretty well by now.

 

[MUnited83]

Someone told me it's Medium PC settings, which is disappointing if true. Most modern PCs should run it pretty well by now.

You could max the damn thing with a PC worse than the current consoles and have it at 60fps as well. It's astouding how bad this is.

 

[bananafactory]

How long until current gen 2 weak vs lazy devs

 

[hwy_61]

I remember getting motion sickness after playing this for half an hour. That was a long time ago. Maybe I'll give it another shot. Take some bomine or something.

 

[epmode]

I disagree with that second sentence. Dishonored absolutely felt held back by underpowered hardware. While the game played very much like Thief (plus superpowers), the levels were waaaaaayyyyyyy smaller in comparison.

 

[Krappadizzle]

Worst part about the port is that the excellent game that is Dishonored may be overlooked because of this. The game absolutely should run at 60fps on PS4/Xbone. It should, but doesn't. It by all other metrics is fine and if you've never played it and have no PC as an alternative(even a modest one at that) there has never been a better console version. It's just extremely disappointing that while it's functionally the same as before, it's not really all that 'improved' either. Game should have run at 60fps and shipped with an FOV slider.

Silver lining being that it's offered at a cheaper price point and even more so if you got the "free" versions from Gold/PS+, it's still disappointing.

 

[Admiral Woofington]

I personally hope the reviews trash it for doing such a cheap fucking attempt at a port. But I fear most might review the game itself instead of the remaster.

 

[Cleve]

I'm tired of mediocre ports like this. If you think something is worthy of the title definitive edition, put out a product that is better or at least as good as the best version already available.

 

[John Kowalski]

I disagree with that second sentence. Dishonored absolutely felt held back by underpowered hardware. While the game played very much like Thief (plus superpowers), the levels were waaaaaayyyyyyy smaller in comparison.

They were about the same as the Deadly Shadows levels. Not exactly bad.

 

[epmode]

They were about the same as the Deadly Shadows levels. Not exactly bad.

That game had the same problem, honestly. Deus Ex 2 as well.

 

[drangleic tourism]

I disagree with that second sentence. Dishonored absolutely felt held back by underpowered hardware. While the game played very much like Thief (plus superpowers), the levels were waaaaaayyyyyyy smaller in comparison.

I felt the level sizes were perfectly fine for the type of game. The gameplay was always focused on a target(regardless of your intent to kill/subdue) and I looked at the areas as basically a stalk box where you track the target in his/her typical hangout. Never felt too constrictive to me.

 

[Jtrizzy]

My recollection is running this at 1080p60 pretty much maxed on a 580 when it came out.

 

[Solid Samus]

Someone told me it's Medium PC settings, which is disappointing if true. Most modern PCs should run it pretty well by now.

I think that's FUD. I know for a fact that the textures mirror the PC's maxed textures with a bit of smoothing applied, at the very least.

 

[Krappadizzle]

My recollection is running this at 1080p60 pretty much maxed on a 580 when it came out.

I remember my 680 easily 1080/60 with this game on release. I'm running it now at 1440p 144fps, it's a very well optimized game in my opinion. Game should have translated very well to 1080/60 with what the consoles have under the hood. I think at most it looks like they added POM, but kept 4x(I assume a hold over from PC)AF. Blech.

 

[Spladam]

You could max the damn thing with a PC worse than the current consoles and have it at 60fps as well. It's astouding how bad this is.

I don't know if "someone told me" is actually a source, I doubt this is the case, as the game was, as you mention, easy on the hardware and pretty well optimized as games go.

 

[kiddCharlemagne]

I look forward to getting it on Games with Gold in about a year, right before Dishonored 2 hits.

Cosign

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I look forward to getting it on Games with Gold in about a year, right before Dishonored 2 hits.

Cosign

These posts crack me up, because they are always wrong.

 

[Cheddahz]

These posts crack me up, because they are always wrong.

Tomb Raider Definitive Edition has only been out for longer than a year and it's about to be a Games with Gold game...right before the release of it's sequel

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Tomb Raider Definitive Edition has only been out for longer than a year and it's about to be a Games with Gold game...right before the release of it's sequel

I stand corrected.

It will be wrong in the case of dishonored though.

 

[Cheddahz]

I stand corrected.

It will be wrong in the case of dishonored though.

Yeah, I doubt Dishonored is going to be given away before the release of the second one

 

[Krappadizzle]

Yeah, I doubt Dishonored is going to be given away before the release of the second one

Bethesda has set a precedent with offering Fallout from last-gen for new purchases of F4 so it's not completely unreasonable at a minimum that backwards compatibility may be offered before D2's release. Which, is almost the same thing sadly.

 

[Timu]

30FPS? It should be 60!!!

 

[Dirtyshubb]

Worst part about the port is that the excellent game that is Dishonored may be overlooked because of this. The game absolutely should run at 60fps on PS4/Xbone. It should, but doesn't. It by all other metrics is fine and if you've never played it and have no PC as an alternative(even a modest one at that) there has never been a better console version. It's just extremely disappointing that while it's functionally the same as before, it's not really all that 'improved' either. Game should have run at 60fps and shipped with an FOV slider.

Silver lining being that it's offered at a cheaper price point and even more so if you got the "free" versions from Gold/PS+, it's still disappointing.

So even though the game runs better than the previous gen versions, somehow it's going to put a bad taste in peoples mouth?

Don't understand that logic at all, anyone who didn't play it on PS3/360 will still get a better experience than if they went back to play it on the old consoles. Any one who actually feels 60fps is a deal breaker will undoubtedly game on PC anyway so they wouldn't have bought it anyway.

 

[uncleniccius]

I look forward to getting it on Games with Gold in about a year, right before Dishonored 2 hits.

Dishonored 2 is coming out in spring..

 

[KHlover]

30 fps

nope

So even though the game runs better than the previous gen versions, somehow it's going to put a bad taste in peoples mouth?

Don't understand that logic at all, anyone who didn't play it on PS3/360 will still get a better experience than if they went back to play it on the old consoles. Any one who actually feels 60fps is a deal breaker will undoubtedly game on PC anyway so they wouldn't have bought it anyway.

I don't understand this apologist logic at all. You have new consoles that are waaaay stronger than the last gen consoles...yet are ok with a game running way worse than it actually COULD run if it were properly ported? Doesn't compute.

 

[Markitron]

Someone told me it's Medium PC settings, which is disappointing if true. Most modern PCs should run it pretty well by now.

I played it in 2012 on a 560 Ti on max settings, and that was a mid-range card from 2010 (I think) It's a great game but it's no looker and not very demanding.

 

[Hanmik]

I am glad the title says REVIEW thread.. and not REVIEWS.. .

 

[M.W.]

Some streamer tried telling his viewers it was 60fps on PS4...???

 

[leng jai]

Gears SP and now this. Worst part is that you can get this for 5 bucks on PC.

 

[Ravidrath]

So the upgrade was for pre-orders only? :\

 

[szaromir]

Gears SP and now this. Worst part is that you can get this for 5 bucks on PC.

Gears SP is not comparable at all as they remade many assets/lighting/other stuff.

 

[Dirtyshubb]

nope


I don't understand this apologist logic at all. You have new consoles that are waaaay stronger than the last gen consoles...yet are ok with a game running way worse than it actually COULD run if it were properly ported? Doesn't compute.

While i agree that potentially the new consoles could of course run this game at 60fps, Should it have been 60fps? Ideally yes of course if the hardware is capable but the devs decided that it wasnt too vital for the purpose of the port.

Im not actually apologising for the devs for not making it 60fps, my main point is that the way some people are reacting is if the game actually runs worse than the last gen versions, or that the port is of terrible quality when the actual truth seems to be it factually plays better than those versions overall. Should it have been improved in all areas compared to those copies? It would be nice of course but at the end of the day this version is for people who havent played the game anyway and want to get to know the series and potentially buy the sequel. Thats the whole reason for its existence, not to give people who played it before a chance to play it better but for those who havent experienced it at all.

With that fact in mind this version is more than sufficient since it runs better than the last gen version which was still good enough for people to praise and recommend.

All im asking for is a bit of logic to be applied by some people, the game is a budget release and if you already owned a digital copy of it from last gen (Thanks PS+) it cost even less (£15) which is a bargain. To me, getting the game with all the DLC is a good deal for someone who never actually got round to playing it in the first place.

 

[Acquiescence]

PlayStation LifeStyle - 8.5

 

[Omni]

Of all the ports and whatnot this generation, this feels like the least necessary. Do people actually want this?

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

So the upgrade was for pre-orders only? :\

That's why I never ordered, figured the silence meant something was up and they just wanted cash upfront rather than a cheap upgrade path for owners. It was $40 when I looked on Wednesday night, nope.

 

[Shaanyboi]

Of all the ports and whatnot this generation, this feels like the least necessary. Do people actually want this?

YOU WANT WHAT THEY TELL YOU TO WANT!

 

[nOoblet16]

While i agree that potentially the new consoles could of course run this game at 60fps, Should it have been 60fps? Ideally yes of course if the hardware is capable but the devs decided that it wasnt too vital for the purpose of the port.

Im not actually apologising for the devs for not making it 60fps, my main point is that the way some people are reacting is if the game actually runs worse than the last gen versions, or that the port is of terrible quality when the actual truth seems to be it factually plays better than those versions overall. Should it have been improved in all areas compared to those copies? It would be nice of course but at the end of the day this version is for people who havent played the game anyway and want to get to know the series and potentially buy the sequel. Thats the whole reason for its existence, not to give people who played it before a chance to play it better but for those who havent experienced it at all.

With that fact in mind this version is more than sufficient since it runs better than the last gen version which was still good enough for people to praise and recommend.

All im asking for is a bit of logic to be applied by some people, the game is a budget release and if you already owned a digital copy of it from last gen (Thanks PS+) it cost even less (£15) which is a bargain. To me, getting the game with all the DLC is a good deal for someone who never actually got round to playing it in the first place.

It doesn't really make sense for you to mention that the game costs £15 if you own it on PS3 digitally, considering that you mention that the whole reason of it's existence is that people who haven't had a chance to play it get to play it.

It is a quick port, and as such it deserves the criticism it is getting because it is bad practice. One step below this and you get Prototype level of remaster which is as bad as they come. The fact is that even ancient hardware are capable of running this game at 1080P/60FPS, and considering that PS4/Bone aren't doing that it only leads me to believe that not enough effort was put into this remaster.

 

[Massa]

Of all the ports and whatnot this generation, this feels like the least necessary. Do people actually want this?

What makes a game "necessary"?

I mean, if you don't need it then just don't buy it.

 

[NIGHT-]

Of all the ports and whatnot this generation, this feels like the least necessary. Do people actually want this?

Prototype?

 

[Surface of Me]

Gears SP and now this. Worst part is that you can get this for 5 bucks on PC.

I kinda think Gears is 30 to alleviate the fact that Gears4 will be 30 in SP and Mp.

 

[Liamc723]

Of all the ports and whatnot this generation, this feels like the least necessary. Do people actually want this?

Yes, I do.

 

[Dirtyshubb]

It doesn't really make sense for you to mention that the game costs £15 if you own it on PS3 digitally, considering that you mention that the whole reason of it's existence is that people who haven't had a chance to play it get to play it.

It is a quick port, and as such it deserves the criticism it is getting because it is bad practice. One step below this and you get Prototype level of remaster which is as bad as they come. The fact is that even ancient hardware are capable of running this game at 1080P/60FPS, and considering that PS4/Bone aren't doing that it only leads me to believe that not enough effort was put into this remaster.

Thats fair enough with regards to the PS+ version comment, it doesn't tie in with the idea of being for people who haven't played it before (event though i do fall into that category).

The comparison to Prototype seems a little off to me though, i mean overall it seems that the game either runs just as well as the previous versions in most aspects or better (resolution). To then say 'one step below' is kind of pointless since the aim of a port is to being a game to a new console, not rework it with lots of effort. The definitive name is with regards to the fact that it includes the base game and all the DLC, while also have a better resolution is a nice bonus.

Basically while i appreciate that people are disappointed that the game isnt 60fps, my point still stands in that the reason for this game being brought out on PS4/XBO is to get people who didnt play it originally invested in the franchise so they buy the sequel. If the game was playable on the last gen then having it slightly better on this gen should be just as fine for that purpose.

 

[Card Boy]

My 2009 1gig HD5870 runs this at 1080p, 60fps and all graphic setting at max. Anything else on current gen consoles is a joke.

 

[Neuromancer]

Of all the ports and whatnot this generation, this feels like the least necessary. Do people actually want this?

Yah

I wanted to do another, more killy, playthrough anyway, so why not. It was only $20.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Of all the ports and whatnot this generation, this feels like the least necessary. Do people actually want this?

I'm buying it next week.

 

[flipswitch]

My recollection is running this at 1080p60 pretty much maxed on a 580 when it came out.

I was running it with SSAA on a 570 gtx/i7 920ghz at 60fps. There's no reason why this isn't at 60fps except being a shoddy port.

 

[SneakyStephan]

How is this only 30 fps?

My old 6870 and phenom II ran this game at over 100 fps at maximum settings.

Sounds like a shitbad port.
the hd6870 is about xbox one level of performance so surely it could have ran at at least 60 fps.

Dishonored was baked lighting and shadows: the game. Which meant it ran on a potato that was prepared in a wooden toaster.