Cyberpunk 2077 2018 Demo vs 2.0 Update 2023 Ray Tracing Overdrive Graphics Comparison
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 лют 2025
- Cyberpunk 2077 2018 Demo vs 2.0 Update 2023 Ray Tracing Overdrive Graphics Comparison
Many thanks to CD Projekt RED for providing early access to Cyberpunk 2077 2.0 Update!
Cyberpunk 2077 2.0 was captured in 4K Ultra RT Overdrive Mode on following rig:
-Gigabyte RTX 4080 Eagle OC 16GB amzn.to/3pYRibp
-Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX amzn.to/3rD1sit
-Gigabyte UD1300GM PG5 amzn.to/43toTIc
-Intel i7 13700K amzn.to/3rAzGD5
-Corsair Vengeance DDR5 32GB amzn.to/43x9pmr
-Samsung 980 Pro SSD 2TB / 1TB / 500GB amzn.to/44WEl0F
-Barracuda 4TB HDD amzn.to/3DmANZD
-Windows 11 amzn.to/3PYzmIy
-Be quiet! Silent Loop 2 360mm amzn.to/3KawpRl
-Be quiet! Pure Base 600 BGW20 amzn.to/44y2lam
Many thanks to Gigabyte for sending PC components for this build!
Thanks for using my Amazon Affiliate links!
Source video:
Cyberpunk 2077 - pierwsza prezentacja; 48 minut rozgrywki
• Cyberpunk 2077 Gamepla...
Kanał GRANALIZA po polsku:
/ @granaliza
Cycu1 Bilibili official Channel: space.bilibili...
Consider supporting my channel for cool bonuses:
/ @cycu1
Looking good quality gameplay for your own videos?
Consider subscribing my other channels to be up to date!
Cycu1 Xbox Archive / @cycu1xboxarchive130
Cycu1 PlayStation Archive / @cycu1playstationarchi...
Cycu1 Nintendo Archive / @cycu1nintendoarchive454
Looking for gift cards?
PSN: amzn.to/3eFkAjM
Xbox: amzn.to/3gzvsl8
Nintendo eShop: amzn.to/2TRMbqf
Looking for RTX Graphics Cards? Check on Amazon: amzn.to/3dzcGYZ
Follow me on Twitter: / cyckiewicz
Find me on Facebook: / cycu1yt
Cycu1's friends:
Jabcook:
/ jabcook
Easy Unboxing:
/ @easyunboxing
Quick Expert Reviews
/ @quickexpertreviews
FA Gamez:
/ mrxboxgamer007
![5 САМЫХ ОШИБОЧНЫХ РЕШЕНИЙ В CYBERPUNK 2077 [by Evoice Erebus x Kupikod]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZXLALPduZqo/mqdefault.jpg)
![5 САМЫХ ОШИБОЧНЫХ РЕШЕНИЙ В CYBERPUNK 2077 [by Evoice Erebus x Kupikod]](/img/tr.png)
Demo had way more cinematic feel due to bloom effect, but currently the lighting is way more realistic. You don't really wade through a light fog on a bright sunny day.
I wouldn't say realistic. The thing with ray tracing is that everything has more contrast and reflection, so look more appealing. It's like those gta mods that adds reflection on everything to look "cool".
@bemlok Those are byproducts, not what Ray Tracing actually does best. It's used for real time light bounce, scatter, and diffusion. Not to mention ray reconstruction and path tracing which is eons ahead of what regular raytracing was offering.
demo didnt even have bloom, reflections, etc
@@bemlok Not even close to what "those GTA mods" are doing. Having "more reflection" is not really the goal of RTRT per se, correct and consistent light behaviour is. After playing with RT 'Overdrive' mode for a while it's really hard to go back.
Agreed, although I will say the pedestrians had far better lighting and shadows cast on them in direct sunlight. Look at 2:40. The shadows they cast on themselves look much better and they overall look more directionally lit, whereas the lighting looks more global and indirect in 2.0. I would imagine for performance's sake. Still doesn't take away from how beautiful the game has become since.
2.0 has way better details. But the Demo lighting gives such a realistic bleakish feel to it.
2.0 is lore accurate compared to demo which lacked the punk aspect
@@DinaricUbermenschuh whats that got to do with color grading?
In realism path tracing is just better because everything is calculated in real time.
The 2.0 update compared to demo looks like Night City have implemented clean air act of some sorts ;) BTW Cracow, one of the most polluted cities in Poland looked like demo (or worse) before clean air act and looks more like 2.0 2 years after.
You can actually get your game to look closer to the demo using ReShade, I personally do that +use a bit of the Curve and Clarity settings to make the game a little sharper and a bit less "hazy" I personally like the bright colors of the current game vs the demo + a lot of other pieces of media in the cyberpunk genre since it does feel a bit more realistic in my opinion as well as the bright colors, flash visuals, loud, bright, and exciting advertisements and whatnot providing a little contrast to the true literal and figurative darkness from the Corps, death and carnage, etc... that actually goes on in the city. I feel like the current version is a bit better storytelling wise besides just overall being more pleasing to the eye even though I tweak it a bit.
there's something about that e3 demo that i cant explain it just looks and gives off different vibes
because it took our hearts when we first saw it
Probably lighting and colors, it's more desaturated (more real) and Retail version is full of colors
@@martinnic8235They did something similar with the Witcher 3 too, in both games I prefer the E3 colors instead of the retail
@@martinnic8235 Yeaah the demo is just less saturated, has raised shadows, blacks, and more haze. They probably also changed some lighting spots specifically for that demo.
It's got very different color grading, and there's more cohesion in crowds.
I prefer the looks of 2.0 better but the Demo for some reason felt more immersive than what it is now.
I think interactivity aside the overall matte finish the surfaces had gave it a more "real" vibe to it, idk how to explain it but I it just feels right the floor being all matte and dusty
Yeah not to mention the multiple outcomes teased. Like with Meredith you had more dialog choices and in the demo Jackie is with you, so you have the option to lie etc. Many RPG elements didn't make the final cut. It's kinda funny how the only missions that feel like you have choices are the ones they showed in gameplay demos (the Malestorm mission from prologue and the Voodoo boys mission).
because it's not real gameplay , it's animated to feel more immersive
It's the guy on the mobility scooter isn't it that makes it.
What!?! The current state of the game looks a million times better than the demo plays out the same too so it's the same exact thing but better looking equals less immersion?
Thanks for recreating scene-by-scene and movement. Completely improved details by now. Of course the 2018 demo looks cool due to the film like lighting - but thats not playable by any standards, just cool looking. Environment details in 2.0 are superior (finally). 6:08 is the key difference where you see buildings in the distance were just undetailed blobs.
A flagship cpu from last year can handle the npcs and physics of the demo
Graphic wise demo is inferior
Nah, highly disagree. The interiors still look superior, while the open world trade blows.
2.0 didn't change the graphics, so your (finally) not an appropriate here. This is the version we had in 2021.
@@MrDarkenral Can't remember having RT Overdrive in 2021. There were some patches that evidently changed environment details and it seems like somehwere between 1.3x and 2.0 they improved the textures. Not gonna discuss that.
8:35
Dang the bloom and lighting just looks so good In the demo the 2.0 update definitely made the difference but man does the demo still look so good
That cop thats saying "so, are we gonna talk about yesterday..." has been going thru the same loop for 3 years now. I wish they would add more of these npc conversations.
All these people preferring E3 graphics either just REALLY miss the hype they were feeling, or they just absolutely adore the colour grey.
Fifty shades of it, dude!
Great comparison, thanks for recreating all those sequences!
2.0 without a doubt looks so much better, amazing quality. I actually see more grittiness with the particle effects with 2.0, if you watch the scene around 7:15 - 8:45 you can see how they enhance the atmosphere of the game.
Demo is better
just a shame that most pc gamers have 1080p graphics from half a decade ago and won't experience the game like this anytime soon
@@KachkaDziub Uh no, and it's not close. You need to have your eyes checked.
@@todddominoes9862 it is better consoomer
2.0 clearly has more complex lighting, but the main reason the demo looks different is because of its decision with tonemapping, tying together shadow and light masses into larger areas, instead of each individual element maintaining equal contrast and the image being further broken up. To me, being intentional and sparing with areas of contrast in an image feels more cohesive, gives the eyes areas of rest, which is just more pleasant to take in, and can actually be an aid in guiding where a player looks, so I like that too. Plus, it adds to the atmosphere by making you feel like you're actually in the shadows of large structures. CDPR has been doing some great work lately but changing art style to highlight technical achievement is a pitfall I've seen other devs fall into as well.
No one wrote you a comment, so I will.
After reading your words I seen it clearly, they fall into trap. The old version had this movie-like visuals, and new one tries to be semi-realistic. Pity, that it could be even better. It just droped from my visual 10/10 to just 8.5, now it's only acceptable
@@dioscur87a 8.5/10 is only acceptable to you?
Did you have Asian parents that wanted only 100s on tests or something? Lol
probably wanted to help nvidia to sell RT cards
I agree with the principles of what you are saying, but I don't think its at all reflected in this video. The washed out, low contrast image presented in the demo typically doesn't draw your eyes to anything, and the details all just become an amorphus blob with no intentionality. It seems to be intentionally lit for a few specific scenes, like when they exit the mega building at the start of the demo, where it looks great, but these moments are much more fleeting. Its okay to prioritise these money shots in a 40 minute demo, but when you're playing a game for 100+ hours, and not just sticking to a predefined route, you need more visual interest than just the occasional good looking frame.
Essentially it feels like its traded looking like a 10/10 5% of the time and 6/10 the other 95% for looking like a 9/10 at almost all times (and sometimes better than that), which is almost certainly the right trade to make when working on a game of this scale.
I think a lot of the lighting changes also comes from changes to the physical lights in the environment, and to the suns position changing (I believe it rises/sets in a different direction in the demo), which was probably a decision made for gameplay reasons.
@@riva2003 I mean, Cyberpunk is basically the flagship RT game now. Any time Nvidia wants to show off a new RT feature, it ends up in Cyberpunk first.
In some ways I feel that the demo still looks really good. The lighting and shadows on Viktor at 5:27, for example, looks way better in the demo. You can see way more detail, whereas during the meeting with Stout, it’s pretty much the opposite. 2.0 looks better in all the same ways.
The population density is way better in the demo, but that resolution is…woof, it looks rough. Especially noticeable during the meeting with Dum-Dum.
All around 2.0 looks way better, but you could really see how they were pushing it with the demo. Even with how slow they’re driving in the demo to give the world time to load in there’s still tons of pop in, and the building textures in general look worse. The design of the city also looks way more improved in 2.0.
Completely agree
looks incredible i just wish they had kept the hazy look a bit more from the demo, the smoggy air looks so awesome and now it just looks like the atmosphere is a vacuum
you can prolly change it in settings
Phantom liberty was designed for new path tracing technology, meaning that the environments in the DLC look smoggy and atmospheric.
Peoples consoles and computers couldn’t run the game smooth so they had to dial it back.
You're stuck in the past on bad graphics.
@@dragonsyph2557 no you don’t understand what i’m saying
I almost prefer the 2018's hazy dull visuals. lol but amazing how far this game came. The biggest improvement is the character textures and models.
Demo still wins for me, it has a much more natural look to it, the city looks more real and atmospheric.
It's just a green tint filter from the current game. There is a mod that remove it & give more natural lighting to the overall visuals.
And the npc/crowd behaviors and animation blending are way better in the demo. No buggy twitchy movement (though demo is for show, so those are undoubtedly/ most likely pre-scripted)
Yeah they downgrade for console plebs 😢
To say it looks more natural is to say that you're just used to "video game" lighting. 2.0 is way more accurate and closer to actual natural lighting than pretty much any game before it. It's literally simulating the light. That being said you're still entitled to prefer the demo. I'm just disagreeing with your natural point.
The demo was faked and wasn't actual footage
Cyberpunk 2077 with path tracing really is something else. It looks very clean.
No it doesn't. It adds crazy ghosting and blurring, seems my videos.
With the right hardware it doesnt.
@@OjStudios "the right hardware" I have a 4090 what else currently is "the right hardware" that doesn't have Path Tracing ghosting?
@@BryceCzirr-jz7ju Frame generation, ray reconstruction and all that on? Without that there is ghosting due to nature of the path tracing and light calculation. Might also be a bug that'll be adressed in a patch.
@@OjStudios There is ghosting with path tracing but only in some scenes. Having a 4090 as well. I ignore it, because the overall quality gain outweighs the drawbacks for me.
I wish they could add a saturation option in the settings to make the colors more natural. Sometimes it just feels oversaturated and that's it
use reshade
Try changing your monitor/TV settings
The lighting is what makes the demo look so good but in reality 2.0 is definitely better.
Just bought that game at 2.12 and with path tracing + HDR10 I find myself looking around so much that the npc's are pestering me to do my quests.
CD Projek Red didn't give up on their game and ultimately delivered on what they said the game would be.
That is literally just not true at all like 75% of the shit they said would be in the game is still NOT in the game
@emma6648 Sure it is you just have to look harder.
@@theanalogcirclepodcast.9416 I’ve 100% the game like 15 times now but go on watch any trailer or interview from years ago and you can write a Novel on all the lies
@@emma6648 are those 75% here in this room with us?
@@theanalogcirclepodcast.9416is this a joke or what😂, anyway the whole every choice matter, you can become whoever you want in night city etc. is still bullshit
really fun game, spent over 200hrs in it last year
Same 😂
The amount of content in this game is baffling and it is all centralized compared to the Witcher where quests are spread wide across vast regions of fields, marshes, swamps, etc.
In Night City, the next gig, mission or band of gangoons can be around the next corner and/or a phone call away.
@@95v37 exactly, it always feels like theres something to do and in a way that isnt overbearing either.. i have no idea what people mean when they say that the city is "empty" or there is "nothing to do"
what a waste lolll
@@CropDudia480p the city is dead. NPC act like zombies. Starfield is allot better when it comes to quest. npc
I think that now it looks even better
The demo or the final
0:03 biggest downgrade in the game-- they lied about having morbidly obese denizens zooming around on motorscooters in the game world. I WANT MY SIXTY DOLLARS BACK NOW
2.0 looks miles better in every way, anyone who disagrees is crazy. 🤪
The lighting alone is miles ahead, let alone resolution.
The only boon the demo has is leds and signs which actually look like they're glowing, but even that's inconsistent as the Maelstrom eyes look way better in 2.0..
Amazing how small little details make a world of difference. I prefer 2.0 but some city smog would definitely tie a bow on the 2.0 update.
I forgot there were so many text pop-ups about people and places in the 2018 demo while you're walking around the city. Really glad they relegated that info to the scanner view, I imagine they got a lot of feedback from playtesters and such saying the screen was too busy
Overdrive with the E3 mod 👌
I think theyve surpassed what they showed at E3. Not for ps4 or xbox one but on PS5 Series X and Pc. Its rare to see something become better than its tech demo. Also great job on the video.
So truee
The demo is a vision for the game and a target render. The game on the other hand is the real thing.
the lower contrast definitely makes the E3 version seem more realistic, even if the fidelity itself is much worse
Looks like the primary difference is the e3 demo has "overcast" weather which typically causes a more "realistic" vibe in games because our brains for some reason see that as closer to real. You'll notice with a ton of "realistic" game mods, trailers for the mods will show overcast skies typically. Tends to cast better soft shadows in that weather in most game engines.
So it's likely the reason they chose that weather for the E3 demo. I imagine if you got a weather mod for the game, and showed it under similar lighting, it might look much better now.
К сожалению спустя время мы так и не получили тот киберпанк который нам обещали
The Demo had more character to it, more 'cinematic'. There's a lot of focus nowadays on making light and reflections looks realistic, which is fine, but when you go to a film you don't get 'realistic' light, light is still manipulated and shaped in some way to give it that cinematic feel. Same goes for colours, they felt more saturated/vivid in the demo, which lendt itself well to the feel of the game. Still a good looking game in 2.0, great looking even, just it lost a touch of mood.
es un juego no una pelicula
no it didnt, 2.0 looks like the source material 2077 is based on
You are so wrong it hurts. Insane that you can't see how much better 2.0 is.
The lighting in the demo is far from being cinematic. Lights used in filmmaking behave like lights that bounce around coz they're actual light sources. It's the 2.0 version that's way more cinematic that the demo. The demo is anything but cinematic because the light is just not behaving like light.
@@DinaricUbermenschthe “source material” are black and white comics lmao
Something about the lighting in the demo makes it look more natural I think, maybe a reshade could come close to it. Overall the current release has more detail and better lighting with overdrive, but man something about the atmosphere looks better in the demo.
The demo look like a rockstar games when the release look just like a good looking game.
I think part of it is the softness of everything in the demo, it seems like it’s all being rendered low res and then upscaled. The thing is that this game will never look like real life, and the newer versions of it have sharper edges and higher res textures and so on that make it look like a really crisp game render while the demo looks like real life if you blurred your eyes a little. Kind of like how mediocre vfx would benefit from being watched on vhs rather than in 4k. The dull lighting and colours of the demo have the same effect.
I wonder if chromatic aberration, film grain, and motion blur have anything to do with it. Most people I’ve seen turn those off for a crisper image, but I figure there must be a reason developers are so hard set on keeping those effects
ray tracing sucks hahahahha its fake and rainbow
The sharpened contrast and bloom lighting does look more attractive but I think the one on the right is much better for gameplay purposes. In film it’s the photographer's job to highlight and obscure certain things in the camera FOV to tell the story, but in an open world video game it could end up becoming detrimental for the exploration part of it.
I think demo looks better. İt is mainly because the lighting is more impressive. as If it has HDR and the current game is definitely a lot more dull in specural highlitgts and lighting. 8:30 you can see here that characters have self casting shadows reflected on themselves. This is a very expensive solution. Most games don't do this. If you look at cyberpunk 2.0 you will see that self shadows are much less defined.
Demo didn't have overdrive RT, but the feel it had, even visuals, is something they definitely need to pursue for THE SEQUEL
I suspect pre baked lighting for the demo
@@itachisasku look how alive the city looks and feels, that's what I was trying to explain. Complex and close to real life npc behavior is what makes such games stand out. Everything is more... believable in the demo.
The intensity of the sun light was a big part of that, it would look more realistic if they did it in game, but people would complain like crazy cause it would blind the player constantly when facing the sun. You can sort of accomplish something similar when you turn HDR on and change some settings.
@@itachisasku what I mean is that the brightest light possible in the game is not all that bright unless you use HDR. Like for example, if you were to look at something that is in sunlight in some super sunny place like Nevada while the rest of what you see is in the shade, then the light would be so bright you won't be able to see anything, it would just be blank white to your eyes. This doesn't really happen much in the game for obvious reasons. People want to see what they are shooting at even in sunlight. If you turn on HDR and put peak brightness super high and contrast high then you can sort of get this effect, but in SDR not really.
Demo better.
I always will love this demo and this look.
there's a mod with lighting and a similar color tone to the demo, it's pretty well made and should be updated soon
@@imshail name of the mod?
@@noisyguy4013 E3 visual overhaul
cut content, cut content everywhere + the atmosphere of the demo was much more depressing and dystopic wich is way more consistent to the plot of cyberpunk
problem is fanboys dont understand this
they dont look at the "soul" or atmosphere of a game, only the better graphics
It’s like comparing Watch Dogs trailer with the actual game
we need those mobility scooters NPC back
Nothing beats the demo
It gave off more bladerunner vibe
more dialog options and interactions
and time to time 3rd person views which made it absolutely perfect
10:24 I don’t get how you can say this whilst the 2.0 version clearly looks better.
The Witcher 3 pre downgrade looked special and better than what we have now, but with cyber cd project red improved it drastically
8:10 Demo looks 16x better
@@alemdevp2048Virgin baked in lighting console player vs Chad RTX path traced realistic environment user
2023 is more like bladerunner are u blind
Love gloomy feeling of original one, which suits portrayed future. They couldn't match it saddenly even though graphic quality is clearly superior in newer version
Paused in 12:47 you really can see the difference clearly, 2.0 is much better, more detailed, its more like 12:46 before the blue effect, but for some reason the frame stay blurred if you wanted try paused in 12:46 is better
There's some world animations (active elevators and lights) that I wish stayed from the demo, but other than that, it's definitely much better now.
What about the downgraded choices, interaction and branching story? The heavily downgrades combat, movement like running on walls and leaping off the ceiling, Downgrades AI, downgrades Pedestrian and population variety? Everything's much better now?
I'll admit that the 2018 demo wasn't as dishonest and misleading as the demos CDPR showed for The Witcher 3, seriously, you should look at those, they were absolutely ridiculous, worse than Anthem, No Man's Sky or any demo for any other game I can remember. Is what CDPR did with Cyberpunk acceptable though?
@@7dayspking Both ended up being great games.. how they got there kinda sucked, but at least they kept trying to make things better.
@@Bry.89 I disagree with you on Cyberpunk. And what TW3 promised was nothing short of magic, the impossible. A game where each quest can span the entire map, intertwines with dynamic events everywhere and NPCs everywhere. You really should check those E3 demos. They were insane. More insane than the dumb stuff people imagined Cyberpunk would be like every NPC having handmade schedules and living in an enterable house or hotel room.
@@KPTKleist And it's dishonest to show these concepts to consumers to market a game.
@@7dayspking True, and it took quite some development effort to tape together a demo at a point when there wasn't a game at all yet. They should generally move towards showing demos like that closer to release. A demo from a late devopment stage will be much closer to the final product and will also not waste as much development time.
It's interesting how in certain circumstances the Demo lighting looks slightly better (such as when talking to NPCs), but in others the 2.0 lighting looks better, such as when driving around. The lighting on the environment and the car has much more detail and depth.
The demo seems to be in 1080p and the update 2.0 to 4k, it looks much sharper and the highlights and shadows reflections look incredible, now I'm ready to play this great game 😊
Probably yes, but in 2018 best graphics card was 2080ti which one cant handle this game at even 1440p ultra rtx
nothing beats the demo.. and in ten years there will be nothing that beats the demo hahaha, this guys sold us smoke in that year.. what a smoke
2018 looks better less shiny bs everywhere
@@mikesea12 literally 2.0 and pre 2.0 beat the demo.
Demo better.
There's no point in making videos, they'll keep saying that the E3 trailer was better, but that's a fucking lie. Cyberpunk was the only game that didn't have a graphics downgrade but rather an improvement
consume product
I don't remember the wheelchair user at the beginning of the video 🤣
You really start to appreciate all of the work it takes to make a game when you start looking at every little that got moved around. Little things like a manhole cover being rotated, or trash in a bin being rearranged to look more natural
The "cyberpunk" word itself draws me pictures of cold neon lights in the night, fog and steam around the streets, a mix of high tech and low life mistery. And those bright sunny days make it look more like farcry.
The characters in the 2018 demo looking way better, then some details in 2.0 looking better, but overall the lighting and stuff is better on the 2018 demo.
The demo legit looks fantastic, I got no idea how they fucked it up that badly by the time they released the full game in 2020. They could have kept quiet and just improved the game for a couple more years instead of teasing fans with trailers and pushing back the release date 7 times, and ultimately underdelivering.
This is how a best game being beaten by itself. An already best looking game gets to an even higher peak.
In the beginning everything looks better in the 2.0 version: better reflections, better volumetric lighting, better glow, but then in many scenes lighting in the demo looks more cinematic. Maybe they decided that cinematic look the demo had is good for presentation, but not good for gameplay, idk. But there is something special about demo version I like. Anyway the final game looks very good. In some moments better, in some worse than the demo, but overall it is the same high quality as in the demo. Very good work.
I prefer cinematic and dramatic😅
the 2.0 looks too colorful it's like your phone camera using too much filter but lack depth
Demo version wasn't even a thing. they just put something togather to present as "demo". it was faked. just like Anthem's E3 demo.
i do agree that, some look worse some of that look better, maybe have reason it self
They decided just a "little" lied to gamers lol
The demo looks better, fits the dark tone of the game. Even the NPCs look better. They must have toned them down for the consoles. The scene with Vic had top notch graphics.
On pc with mods everything looks better than the demo including npcs. The only thing the demo has is how fluid the npc animations look
2.0 looks way better, and if you don't like it you can just download a weather mod that makes the lighting match the E3 demo. If you're on console, you shouldn't care either way because it's honestly just astounding that the game even runs on console
I always see prototype HUDs in betas and tech demos and every time wonder why the devs elect to go with whatever they release the game in. Nonetheless, I think the 2.0 (and even 1.0) release visually fairs better than the tech demo.
Because those prototype huds are often unfit for the entire game and all its elements. That hacking UI from this demo for instance was a mess that would never fly in a released game. The compass map would not work with gameplay elements like stealth, level geometry and guard sights. There are also accessibility concerns. The current hud is well visible while the demo one was dim which can be a problem when playing. You don't want the HUD to melt into the scene. For a non HUD example see the 2019 nanowire which was super saturated and glowy compared to the thin and low light release version. Playing with such a lit element constantly close to the screen is a massive eyesore. It's probably also why Odas blades are not usable by the player. I tried a mod that enabled them and it killed my eyes
Thank God they took away those markers from the demo. That'd been the first thing to be turned off.
Both look the same and different at the same time. Great game, great video.
@5:47 the way the tip of his robotic finger grabs the cap or whatever looked cool and was functional in 2018, now it doesn't even move, just clips/fake grabs it, it's details like that i wish they didn't cut and downgrade, but otherwise looks good, they came pretty close and touched up other elements at least even if some were sacrificed/removed, of course some are just artistic changes
Those who made this demo admitted that everything in this was scripted.
Took them month to make it.
I did read that article.
@@SeriousDragonify yeah a lot of times initial trailers are target renders, so yeah it's great how close they were able to match it
@@melxb Well Spider-Man wasn't scripted but before release they did show to look just like this. I mean on street chase part leak, not Devil base part and helicopter.
I don't know but they shot themselves with the spoiling game way early of Negative leader and for some strange reasons changed Martin Li into some hired guy.
If companies were more like Insomniac with minor changes like removing puddles then way less would be complained.
big difference, this time i actually enjoyed the play through however there are things still bugged like some storyline quests dont start after they say "wait a day and *blank* will call you" but they never call you.
I love path traycing as much as the next guy but the e3 lightning fits the game better and even if it feels unnatural in some parts its still amazing (especially for 2018)
yeah 2018 version looks better. I think they had to turn down some graphical settings to get 2.0 to run better on more systems.
unfortunately, a lot of games suffer from what I call "the sterile effect"
It all looks good, too good, too clean. Even with dirt decals, shaders and other tech marvels, the devs love their shiny surfaces even in places where there should be none. It kills the overall perception of the world.
You go to this filthy city in the middle of the desert and everything is so clean you could eat from it.
@@SickPrid3 i feel like it would be cool to keep the dirty concrete/gray looking feel in watson and maybe reserve all the shiny stuff for the places around the city center. the roads in the release version feel way too reflective for their own good as opposed to the ones in e3 looking very rough, barely reflecting light from the sun
@@b3at2 doubt that in 2.0 graphics are better textures and everything even the buildings from far away have texture in the demo they looked ugly
@@b3at2 and that is definitely not true as the game is a little harder to run now that dlc is out
The sun location for the demo also plays a role, at 8:30 the sun is directly hitting her face, as a result you see more shadow details on her face as she moves her head around.
Animations were also massively downgraded for the release especially facial
The demo had more objects, bloom effects and light sources. The current one had better lighting.
I'll be the guy to say, the dusty and mostly matte textures the demo had are super cool and honestly I prefer that, but the lighting today is much better
Great job syncing both versions!
I doubt it was easy.
2.0 looks better - and with it there is most of the part more detail in the scenes. Only the Main Characters seem to have better shading and quality.
I think it looks technically better, theres a lot of stuff that's changed that isn't necessarily for the better (like crowd density or the elevator rides being longer). The stylistic choices between that demo and the real game are what made the difference IMO, and why people like the demo more.
I remember 2018 demo looked like what we got in cyberpunk 1.0 release, but I reall ylike the 2.0 path tracing and the reflections of the light.
10:08 the little detail that Jackie was waiting for you at the car... BRUH.. why did they remove the little details!
lightning and graphics aside, it amazes my how many small and seminally insignificant things they changed in 2.0. Different textures and models for some background props and outfits, different ads, different elevator hud, different model for Dum Dum, stuff like that.
Hmm some things in the demo are just better looking, and I'm not even talking about the lighting. Somehow I like the more gray look. I feel like they ruined a lot of objects in the game by just
adding way too much color or weirdly shiny surfaces like the concrete road at 6:44. It looks so much more believable and realistic in the demo than the red and shiny thing. Honestly the lighting looks pretty much on par with the demo it's just, why did they rework so many of the 3D objects? Seems like development of other things took longer than the 3D objects so the artists had nothing else to do than "redo these things" and then they did it by straying from the original vision.
Then again at 6:15 the release version looks way better. I feel like a lot could be achieved with some kind of color grading that didn't make everything look so overly contrasty and bright.
Yea it looks like a cartoon now.i had to on hdr lower exposure to 30 to make it look decent
its supposed to look colorful, thats how the source material 2077 is based on looks but still has a gritty feel to it@@wingedhussar1453
Crazy that 3 years later the hype for this game fizzled out, but now the game is at a level that it should have been at release
Fizzled out isn’t the word id have used more like imploded on itself lmao
They wanted to make the gameplay more smoother and PC friendly but able to look like RTX, still amaze me tho they manage it under 100gb with all this
Its the volumetric lighting though I know that 2.0 is more advanced. Its the haze and fog and this lends itself to the "realistic" vibe we all see in the demo. Too much realism was an early problem for 4K movies like Iron Man which suddenly seemed like a crisp documentary, having lost the "movie magick." This is the main difference. The demo has more of an alternate reality feel than the retail version. Rendered in game engine CGI with a spapsh of love. 😉
It's like the engine is trying to hard. Even Vic looks better in the demo. Not more detailed graphically, but his face looks better and more human without the shades. Meredith's eyes look more human, less uncanny valley in the demo.
The only thing I loved about cyber punk was walking around, driving around and the no loading screens it felt good not looking at black screens
6:14 wow the difference is huge in better direction
Colors from the demo are more neutral looks more real
see Meredith hair how realistic in the demo
Indeed demo realistic ... Patch 2. cosmetic!.
Demo is more pleasing to me, would love to see with path tracing which isnt possible unless CDPR do it.
Not gonna lie, that mobility scooter is sorely missed.
Final product looks more detailed and all especially indoors, its just that the lighting in the demo outdoors looks phenomenal.
That feeling when the demo looks better than the release
Once you get the driving sequence its very clear to me how much better 2.0 looks compared to the demo.
To match the Demo, on your GPU or Display setting, make the gamma lower, and contrast lower,
Can't really match the bloom, but will match the dark/lightness of the colors
I like how the demo looks, in some aspects the lighting is sometimes better than 2.0 as well as the shadows and population density, I also like that it looks more cinematic
It's hard to believe a company reclaimed its glory years later on their product and made it even better than what it was. I just hope they give the players more DLC's because they have a perfect foundation of a game to give us more content. They could ride on this game for few years to come.
The demo roads and some buildings have a larger scale compared to release, which I hope they fix, some roads on release can fit two cars side by side, and the fix for that, is they just removed traffic going towards that road.
no se porque pero la demo tiene un aire como a película retro futurista de los ochenta. Capas sea a la paleta de colores o algo, pero me hace recordar a algo retro.
the demo's picture has less bells and whistles, but it looks softer and much more naturally. models and the city contain less details, but the demo often provides significantly better ambient occlusion and general lightning. I'd prefer playing with the demo's graphics.
u can mod in the lighting from the e3 demo pretty easily, it looks alright ngl i prefer it that way
Better ambient occlusion and lighting? By what metric? Realism or just preference? 2.0 is simulating how light works. The ambient occlusion and lighting are almost perfect compared real life. What's really happening is people are so used to how video games have cheated lighting and shadows, for so long now, that they don't actually know what to look for. It's become an authentic in its own right for sure, but it's definitely not more realistic. That's not to say there's anything wrong with liking the old methods authentics, though. I just wouldn't say they're better in terms of more natural or realistic compared to what 2.0 is doing.
bullshit, it was all fake lightning in 2018 demo
I don't know how they did it, but damn it, the demo has a realistic feel to it. It's like an art film with a psychological gray theme.
I like the Demo's look, it looks like the early part of Ghost in the Shell, and feels more like a city inside a desert. Also reminds me of oldschool Gundam movies. Very immersive.
DEMO 2018 zdecydowanie bardziej realistyczne i duuuuuuuuużo lepiej wygląda ! Chrzanić detale, realistyczność dużo większa. CP 2.0 sux
Demo look more realistic, it has to do something with lighting direction and atmospheric effects that tight the scenes together..
It’s like comparing warm white vs cool white lightbulbs 💡
Stout in the E3 demo was waaaay more expressive and memorable... why?!!??!??!
Cp2077 is one of the best looking games out there’s no doubt about that, but there’s something very beautiful about the demo that makes it look more realistic. It’s like certain effects make it feel more futuristic such as the police tape and digital crosswalk. Tho they kept those in the game they drastically changed how they looked. Same with the lighting, looks more realistic, everything looks more crisp in the finished game but like that’s part of the problem… it looks too crisp where as the demo had smog, almost polluted look to it which I feel like added more character. I think this just goes to show you that atmosphere can make more of an effect on a games graphics then the actual detail of the game itself.
Improved from retail, but still below the E3 demo.
Can’t even lie, the demo looks unfinished af.
@@fifteen8850bc it is unfinished bud its a DEMO
I understand how people can like the look of the lighting and bloom effect from the demo, it does give a more "cinematic" and gritty feel. But the release 2.0 not only has superior detail and realistic lighting, it is more lore accurate. The more washed out, bloom lighting from the demo is bit reminiscent of Blade Runner 2049. You even see UI influences from that film in the demo. But, that is not lore accurate to the Cyberpunk brand. Love it or not, the release version is how the world of Cyberpunk is supposed to look. Bright, colorful, and violent. You can also see that intent on clear display in the Edgerunners anime.
Now, Blade Runner and its sequel are two of my favorite films of all time. So, that demo look definitely has a certain appeal to me. Still, I have to admit it is not right for this world.
Funny how initially it just looks like somebody fixed the contrast and brightness/gamma 😄 But there are lots of little details, reworks, and small visual changes everywhere.
6:23 I like the car camera more in actual game. In the demo it feels like arcadish like in Gran Turismo or something that's i hate. The camera is no more "glued" to back of the car.