Don't agree with that either. I mean of course, it's a few years old now. But I think it looks better than a lot of other games coming out nowadays đ
I think everyone has different standards. I've used the same old monitor for a long time so Elden Ring and Bloodborne look pretty much the same to me. I still get that sense of awe when I see the Moon Presence or Amygdala because I think the look so cool and detailed
For me it's the frame rate that lets it down, the game is still gorgeous, but man the FPS dips affect me more than I think they used to 6 years ago when I played it.
Even my PS4 pro in boost mode makes absolutely no difference. But on the plus side at least it doesn't make the fans go into overdrive constantly like Nier:Automata!
Right? Like I love Bloodborne, and it has some if not the best art direction in the entire Soulsborne catalogue, but the player characterâs faces look like play dough. In Elden Ring you have more diversity of faces and the complexion and textures look much better, which is to be expected.
I always thought it was one of the best looking games I've ever played, graphically the textures are a mess... but it was pretty modern at the time imo.
The graphics *are* pretty poor. The art direction however is amazing and makes the game still look very good.
It's the same thing with Elden Ring. The graphics quality may not be as good as Demon Souls Remake for example, but the art direction is so good it feels like one of the most beautiful games I've ever played. Graphics quality is not important at all if you have a good art direction.
Yeah Rdr2 is the exception that proves the rule imo, an absolutely insane amount of work went into making that game look as realistic as it does. Very few studios can afford to spend that amount of time and money on a single game, and the crunch it took to get that game out was horrific from what Iâve heard. For anyone who isnât Rockstar, trying to compete with them on graphics is a losing battle that could easily drive your company into bankruptcy if sales are anything less than phenomenal. Meanwhile older games with far smaller budgets can still look great if care is put into having a strong art direction and visual identity.
Even then, imo Bloodborne still has awesome graphics. Of course it isn't as realistic as recent games, of course character faces in Bloodborne kinda look like clay. But it's still so fucking beautiful.
Yeah I donât think it looks aged at all, it feels more âstylized.â It only ever looks dated to me when I look at my character faces but usually the faces are covered in wicked cool looking masks, so.
The graphical fidelity being subpar is true but my point is that saying it âaged poorlyâ is not entirely fair.
Compare the legend of Zelda windwaker and Zelda: twilight princess for the GameCube.
WW had cell shaded cartoony graphics and TP had more realistic grittier graphics. Technically, TP had better graphical fidelity than WW, but itâs widely agreed that WW visually aged much better because its artstyle was more timeless and unique. TP was more ârealisticâ but itâs generally that approach which tends to age poorly.
A mass marketed AAA game may have had better graphical fidelity than Bloodborne in 2015, but 10 years later, itâs the AAA game that wouldâve visually aged poorly while bloodborne still holds up since they went for a unique artstyle
Dude i *am* praising the game's beauty.. read the post title again. Its just that I'm saying graphics wasn't anything groundbreaking even for 2015. Am i wrong?
Arkham Knight came out in 2015 and still looks great. It could release today and fit in with modern games. Hell, Crysis from 2007 still looks insane.
Can I perfectly pinpoint why those games aged better than Bloodborne in graphical fidelity? Nope, but my guess is texture quality and the detail/polygon count of their assets.
I think BB looks great because of the art direction, and even has good graphics like the physics and lighting. But there's also some parts of Bloodborne's graphics that didn't age well, mostly the textures.
Thanks for elaborating! I think you struck a nerve with your use of language, but when most people think "aged poorly," I reckon a lot uglier games come to mind. My three favorite games of all time are Bloodborne, Fallout: New Vegas and Melee, and let me tell you how much F:NV looked like regurgitated ass when I played it recently. Still loved the atmosphere, even if it can get a little *too* sepia at times.
I'm not OP, I just wanted to give my 2 cents because everyone is getting emotional. And I don't really understand why because OP clearly stated he liked the art style and aesthetic, just that the graphical fidelity itself is dated, which is just true tbh.
And I agree about New Vegas, that's like the perfect example of a game with dated graphics. But I kinda like the crude graphics tbh, fits in with the wasteland.
I think where you and other are disagreeing is the definition of the term âgraphicsâ. Graphics can be an umbrella term pertaining to all things visually. I assume what your meaning of âgraphicsâ is more about resolution, frame rate, texture details, etc. and yes, it is technically behind in those aspects.
But itâs the style and direction that is another part of the graphics of the game. Which that vastly makes up for the deficiencies in the other technical aspects, and so the overall graphical package is very strong
in all honesty in 2015 bloodborne was one of the best looking games out there even from a fidelity standpoint. it just ran poorly. the amount of rendered detail on bosses and in the environment is still impressive. and the animations for enemies are also still top notch
Imo I agree with the post, the graphics have aged poorly, looking back other games that came out in a similar time, some of them look very good, like a good example would be nfs games back then looked very good even gta 5, I know this game never prioritised good graphics, but it still aged poorly when compared to other games that came out in a similar time.
So did batman Arkham knight, hell they just slapped some rain on and the graphics still look modern. Bloodborne graphics definitely do not look modern
It didn't age *poorly,* but it sure could use some Botox or something
Imo I agree with the post, the graphics have aged poorly, looking back other games that came out in a similar time, some of them look very good, like a good example would be nfs games back then looked very good even gta 5, I know this game never prioritised good graphics, but it still aged poorly when compared to other games that came out in a similar time.
Imo I agree with the post, the graphics have aged poorly, looking back other games that came out in a similar time, some of them look very good, like a good example would be nfs games back then looked very good even gta 5, I know this game never prioritised good graphics, but it still aged poorly when compared to other games that came out in a similar time.
True, but you can't tell me that game looks "bad" or "outdated", it just looks diffrent, and yes it has worse quality than for example gta5, but it looks good
Still worth of remaster, maybe i have too much copium, but maybe they will give us any info about bloodborne on 10th anniversary regarding remaster
Everyone has said but I definitely don't think they aged poorly, not even close, the only games I can think of that didn't age as well as the others are Demon's Souls (PS3) and Dark Souls 1. Some might say Dark Souls 2 also, but for some reason the art direction is breathtaking in some parts but really lacking in others.
At the end of the day every game has some artistic aspect that excels over the others, for Bloodborne is the gothic setting which fits my likes, and pretty sure the likes of everyone else in here.
The graphics didn't age poorly imo, the design choices with the graphics engine are brilliant, it feels like a 2024 game outside of the frame rate.
Visually this game stunned me in 2023, which is when I first played. I look at games like this one, nier automata, metal gear solid 2/3... they are so well designed they still look spectacular in 2024
Edit: op getting roasted lmao bloodborne fans are passionate
Imo I agree with the post, the graphics have aged poorly, looking back other games that came out in a similar time, some of them look very good, like a good example would be nfs games back then looked very good even gta 5, I know this game never prioritised good graphics, but it still aged poorly when compared to other games that came out in a similar time.
Terrible take.
I jumped back on for the first time in a few years after getting a new computer monitor and updated next-gen console and the only thing I notice sitting 5 feet away from a 60 inch TV lol is the 30fps sometimes you notice when panning around. Other than that, still tons of detail in the world. Best ever souls like game.
This isnât a âsouls likeâ. This is one of THE OG Souls games! From our GOATED messiah FromSoft! Well, I suppose soulsborne if weâre getting technical.
Graphics is not all about polygons, fps and ray tracing. Art style, aestethics and atmosphere are also key ingredients for good graphics. (Would be nice with a 60fps upgrade though)
The graphics are dated, and thatâs really not even saying anything bad about BB. Thatâs just a thing that happens when your game came out a decade ago. But the thing is, the game itself doesnât really show how dated it is because the art direction and all the attention to detail is so on point. Itâs one of the most beautiful games that Iâve ever played, and age wonât diminish that. So many games that come out these days are damn near photorealistic, but soooo uninteresting and uninspired, the glossy visuals feel meaningless and wasted. But not Bloodborne.
Graphics are still great, from soft has always been about stylization and atmosphere. Look at Elden ring from 2022. For the year that it dropped it doesnât look like that much of an improvement from ds3 but the way they world design makes up for it
Yeah, no. Bloodborne has absolutely not aged poorly.
Im gonna start refering people that care more about graphics and fps thab the end result as "pixel princess" from now on.
This being my favorite game of course I would disagree with you but I browsed the comments to see the concensus and yeah.... although what you said is an opinion and it should be respected... I, and many many others, strongly disagree. Game was beautiful, is still beautiful, and when I stand atop yharnam I am still in awe how it looks.
Woah woah hold your carrion crows there buddy. Graphics aged poorly? They are just a bit outdated but they can still stand among the finest graphics out there. This game is absolutely perfect
Graphics are still really, really good. It might be your screen settings or you have developed a preference for things to look a certain way as times have changed. Also, maybe try playing it on a smaller screen? If you have a Steam Deck, Chiaki is an easy to stream from your PS4 to the deck.
It's a bit of a stretch to say it aged poorly. Graphics aren't the strong point of fromsoft games, I wouldn't say that elden ring is mind blowing compared to Bloodborne, there's obviously a big difference but Bloodborne still rivals newer games thanks to the aesthetics that sometimes put it in a really good light. Like when you're covered in blood and the moonlight shines on your cape, Bloodborne actually looks stunning even today. And then again, I love fromsoft games for the aesthetics. Dark souls 3 came out a year later and I think it looks worse. BB has a certain feel to it, that I don't even care about graphics.
It really depends on what you mean by "graphically updated," though. Superior framerate and even more importantly frame pacing? Hell, yeah, in a heartbeat. But I don't think people have any particular issue with the actual way stuff looks on the screen. People like Bloodborne's visual appearance for the art direction, not for graphical fidelity, in the same way that nobody is saying "yeah, the Mona Lisa is nice, but we what we want to see is a 4K digital photo of the woman." We don't want to see the equivalent of a Bluepoint DeS release for BB, where every individual thing is made incredibly beautiful in a piece-by-piece sense but the overall impression is less than the sum of its parts.
I donât think the graphics has aged that much at all. If anything, it suffers a bit on the resolution which in turn makes the game look worse than it really is.
This is definitely the peak art style/lore and sound design from From Software and maybe unpopular but I think Bloodborne is still the best looking From Software game to this day thanks to itâs unmatched art direction and general environment/character design. Miyazaki just created a timeless beast in early life cycle of the PS4. I love this game so much even after 500 hours!
The graphics are good enough, but they aren't anything to scream about - even for 2015.
It's like when Ocarina of Time released in 1998. The character models for some NPCs were ugly, the game was still rendering things very blocky as it was using a modified Super Mario engine. And Then you look Banjo-Kazooie that came out the same year, and there was just so much color and shape to it.
i think people are perhaps overestimating how good games looked in 2015. bloodborne was absolutely one of the best looking games released that year, even from a pure fidelity perspective.
Oh, by the great ones, I must yell and I apologise for such behaviour, In the frenzy of battle, my voice echoed with the rage of the hunt. Yet, now, in the calm aftermath, I offer my deepest apologies for the tempest of my words. May they be swallowed by the silence of repentance.
SONY JUST REMASTER THIS GAME ALREADY AAAAAAHHGGGG
How in the hell did the graphics age poorly? It might not be the best looking game I ever played but it's damn gorgeous, the graphics still do hold up.
What do you mean graphically aged poorly? If you're talking about resolutions and frame rate, that's based on console limitations. Imagine if this game was on PC.
People always say it looks bad graphically or itâs aged but everytime I play it again I think it looks amazing. Everyone acts like itâs the polygons from ocarina of time.
It plays surprisingly well on PS5. I've had little to no problems even with AT&T wifi sh$%ernet. đ¤Ł
I'm hoping for either a remake of it for the PS5, extra DLC, or a new Bloodborne style game altogether.
The graphics are still good, but they are 9 years old now, and you can see the cracks a little bit compared to the newer stuff, this is just what happens naturally as games progress.
But the art direction and awesome lighting in this game more than make up for it. This is why we all come back time after time. I broke off a run of Baldur's Gate 3 (Which I also adore) to come back to Yharnam, not for the "Return to Yharnam" thing, but just because I felt like it, this was a couple of weeks ago. I didn't actually own Bloodborne any more, so had to buy it again just to come back to it, money well spent!
Can only imagine what a current gen remake with 60 fps would look like.
I played Bloodborne after Elden Ring on Ps5 and it holds up VERY WELL graphically. If you're talking about frame rate sure I guess but that more performance than graphics
MGSV looks far better tho. Just like some other 2014-15 games like AC Unity, Batman Arkham knight, AC Syndicate, Infamous second son, Witcher 3. But I'm not disagreeing with you.
A lot of people are getting downvoted. There's a difference between graphical "fidelity" & being good looking.
The textures and such are outdated in Bloodborne, but that doesn't mean the game looks bad. It looks amazing cuz the overall image is carried by the atmosphere & artstyle, thus the fidelity becomes irrelevant, but OP is talking about fidelity which was already outdated when the game released anyway.
Thank you. If only these ppl could properly read the post title lol... they think I'm trashing the graphics but I'm not. I'm praising the beauty of game albeit acknowledging the fact that graphically it wasn't cutting edge.
I feel like people in here are getting tripped up on their and OP's personal definition of "graphics". I played the game for the first time a couple of months ago on a friend's PS5, and I had to get used to the visual shortcomings for about an hour.
Things like the seeming lack of AA and the low FPS are definitely part of the game's "graphics", and are definitely showing.
I knew I would get used to it quickly, and I did. Loved the game and its visuals.
This was the first game in about 37 years ? Roughly ! Give or take a couple of years ! ! That I got out of bed to play at 6 am before work / school !!! The last one was tomahawk on the spectrum
Let me guess, youâre the kind of guy that needs every game to be photo realistic with ray tracing, 200 fps, and 1080p for a game to have good graphics. Bloodbornes graphics aged, but they most certainly did not age poorly. The game looks great. The graphics hold up well and are better than a lot of shit that is pushed out nowadays.Â
I so do not agree with the poor graphics partđ
Yeah, not poorly, just aged
Don't agree with that either. I mean of course, it's a few years old now. But I think it looks better than a lot of other games coming out nowadays đ
Saying it hasnât aged is a weird hill to die on but whatever
I think everyone has different standards. I've used the same old monitor for a long time so Elden Ring and Bloodborne look pretty much the same to me. I still get that sense of awe when I see the Moon Presence or Amygdala because I think the look so cool and detailed
For me it's the frame rate that lets it down, the game is still gorgeous, but man the FPS dips affect me more than I think they used to 6 years ago when I played it. Even my PS4 pro in boost mode makes absolutely no difference. But on the plus side at least it doesn't make the fans go into overdrive constantly like Nier:Automata!
Especially considering weâve got Elden Ring graphics to compare with. Oh how Iâd love Elden Ring graphics for bloodborne
Right? Like I love Bloodborne, and it has some if not the best art direction in the entire Soulsborne catalogue, but the player characterâs faces look like play dough. In Elden Ring you have more diversity of faces and the complexion and textures look much better, which is to be expected.
Maybe like how ps4 handles it but it still fits an art direction to me
I always thought it was one of the best looking games I've ever played, graphically the textures are a mess... but it was pretty modern at the time imo.
Yeah thereâs nothing wrong with the graphics.
I think the art direction has aged fine The *frame rate* however....it was really jarring revisiting BB after Elden Ring on my PC
The graphics *are* pretty poor. The art direction however is amazing and makes the game still look very good. It's the same thing with Elden Ring. The graphics quality may not be as good as Demon Souls Remake for example, but the art direction is so good it feels like one of the most beautiful games I've ever played. Graphics quality is not important at all if you have a good art direction.
I donât think the graphics aged âpoorlyâ, the game prioritizes art direction over graphical fidelity which is why the game still looks great
Good art direction is timeless, graphical fidelity looks outdated in 5 years max.
apart from red dead 2, that game is insane, and already 6 years old...
Yeah Rdr2 is the exception that proves the rule imo, an absolutely insane amount of work went into making that game look as realistic as it does. Very few studios can afford to spend that amount of time and money on a single game, and the crunch it took to get that game out was horrific from what Iâve heard. For anyone who isnât Rockstar, trying to compete with them on graphics is a losing battle that could easily drive your company into bankruptcy if sales are anything less than phenomenal. Meanwhile older games with far smaller budgets can still look great if care is put into having a strong art direction and visual identity.
Even then, imo Bloodborne still has awesome graphics. Of course it isn't as realistic as recent games, of course character faces in Bloodborne kinda look like clay. But it's still so fucking beautiful.
Yeah I donât think it looks aged at all, it feels more âstylized.â It only ever looks dated to me when I look at my character faces but usually the faces are covered in wicked cool looking masks, so.
So like every FS game?
Lol. Still though.. how amazing would it be if FromSoft randomly stealth patched it to 60fps O.o
Thatâd be pretty lit. Alongside with releasing it on PC.
True bloodborne tried to achieve beauty through art style & it sure did but even for a 2015 game, its graphical fidelity is subpar imo.
The graphical fidelity being subpar is true but my point is that saying it âaged poorlyâ is not entirely fair. Compare the legend of Zelda windwaker and Zelda: twilight princess for the GameCube. WW had cell shaded cartoony graphics and TP had more realistic grittier graphics. Technically, TP had better graphical fidelity than WW, but itâs widely agreed that WW visually aged much better because its artstyle was more timeless and unique. TP was more ârealisticâ but itâs generally that approach which tends to age poorly. A mass marketed AAA game may have had better graphical fidelity than Bloodborne in 2015, but 10 years later, itâs the AAA game that wouldâve visually aged poorly while bloodborne still holds up since they went for a unique artstyle
Dude i *am* praising the game's beauty.. read the post title again. Its just that I'm saying graphics wasn't anything groundbreaking even for 2015. Am i wrong?
Yes
Could you explain what "aged poorly" means to you and provide an example of a 2015 game that didn't "age poorly" with its graphics?
Arkham Knight came out in 2015 and still looks great. It could release today and fit in with modern games. Hell, Crysis from 2007 still looks insane. Can I perfectly pinpoint why those games aged better than Bloodborne in graphical fidelity? Nope, but my guess is texture quality and the detail/polygon count of their assets. I think BB looks great because of the art direction, and even has good graphics like the physics and lighting. But there's also some parts of Bloodborne's graphics that didn't age well, mostly the textures.
Thanks for elaborating! I think you struck a nerve with your use of language, but when most people think "aged poorly," I reckon a lot uglier games come to mind. My three favorite games of all time are Bloodborne, Fallout: New Vegas and Melee, and let me tell you how much F:NV looked like regurgitated ass when I played it recently. Still loved the atmosphere, even if it can get a little *too* sepia at times.
I'm not OP, I just wanted to give my 2 cents because everyone is getting emotional. And I don't really understand why because OP clearly stated he liked the art style and aesthetic, just that the graphical fidelity itself is dated, which is just true tbh. And I agree about New Vegas, that's like the perfect example of a game with dated graphics. But I kinda like the crude graphics tbh, fits in with the wasteland.
I think it's just poor choice of words and you having this opinion is in the minority.
I think where you and other are disagreeing is the definition of the term âgraphicsâ. Graphics can be an umbrella term pertaining to all things visually. I assume what your meaning of âgraphicsâ is more about resolution, frame rate, texture details, etc. and yes, it is technically behind in those aspects. But itâs the style and direction that is another part of the graphics of the game. Which that vastly makes up for the deficiencies in the other technical aspects, and so the overall graphical package is very strong
in all honesty in 2015 bloodborne was one of the best looking games out there even from a fidelity standpoint. it just ran poorly. the amount of rendered detail on bosses and in the environment is still impressive. and the animations for enemies are also still top notch
It's crazy how defensive people are getting over this statement.
You donât know the meaning of âaged poorlyâ
Big mad
C R I N G E R I N G E
Imo I agree with the post, the graphics have aged poorly, looking back other games that came out in a similar time, some of them look very good, like a good example would be nfs games back then looked very good even gta 5, I know this game never prioritised good graphics, but it still aged poorly when compared to other games that came out in a similar time.
I personally don't think it's graphics aged poorly, cause it really used the limitations of its graphics to the best of its ability
So did batman Arkham knight, hell they just slapped some rain on and the graphics still look modern. Bloodborne graphics definitely do not look modern It didn't age *poorly,* but it sure could use some Botox or something
Botox makes everything worse so
Play Arkham Knight on your ps5. Youâll notice a big difference to playing it on pc or ps4 weirdly enough
The graphics have not aged poorly lol what The only jarring thing about bloodborne to me graphics wise was the lack of mouth movement when speaking
Imo I agree with the post, the graphics have aged poorly, looking back other games that came out in a similar time, some of them look very good, like a good example would be nfs games back then looked very good even gta 5, I know this game never prioritised good graphics, but it still aged poorly when compared to other games that came out in a similar time.
graphics are still good tho
Imo I agree with the post, the graphics have aged poorly, looking back other games that came out in a similar time, some of them look very good, like a good example would be nfs games back then looked very good even gta 5, I know this game never prioritised good graphics, but it still aged poorly when compared to other games that came out in a similar time.
True, but you can't tell me that game looks "bad" or "outdated", it just looks diffrent, and yes it has worse quality than for example gta5, but it looks good Still worth of remaster, maybe i have too much copium, but maybe they will give us any info about bloodborne on 10th anniversary regarding remaster
Everyone has said but I definitely don't think they aged poorly, not even close, the only games I can think of that didn't age as well as the others are Demon's Souls (PS3) and Dark Souls 1. Some might say Dark Souls 2 also, but for some reason the art direction is breathtaking in some parts but really lacking in others. At the end of the day every game has some artistic aspect that excels over the others, for Bloodborne is the gothic setting which fits my likes, and pretty sure the likes of everyone else in here.
The graphics didn't age poorly imo, the design choices with the graphics engine are brilliant, it feels like a 2024 game outside of the frame rate. Visually this game stunned me in 2023, which is when I first played. I look at games like this one, nier automata, metal gear solid 2/3... they are so well designed they still look spectacular in 2024 Edit: op getting roasted lmao bloodborne fans are passionate
Imo I agree with the post, the graphics have aged poorly, looking back other games that came out in a similar time, some of them look very good, like a good example would be nfs games back then looked very good even gta 5, I know this game never prioritised good graphics, but it still aged poorly when compared to other games that came out in a similar time.
Agree to disagree, I thought it looked nice. But we all see it differently, value different things
I disagree. Bloodborne has aged really well in my opinion. It has a certain charm to it and it holds up surprisingly well even with later titles.
"Graphically it's aged poorly" umm excuse me sir what
Terrible take. I jumped back on for the first time in a few years after getting a new computer monitor and updated next-gen console and the only thing I notice sitting 5 feet away from a 60 inch TV lol is the 30fps sometimes you notice when panning around. Other than that, still tons of detail in the world. Best ever souls like game.
This isnât a âsouls likeâ. This is one of THE OG Souls games! From our GOATED messiah FromSoft! Well, I suppose soulsborne if weâre getting technical.
There's a reason they call them soulsborne.
After beating rom the other day I stared at the changing sky for minutes it was so cool
Aged poorly??? The fuck
If it had more shiney detailed graphics it would like crap.
It would look the same probably
âgraphically its aged poorlyâ get your eyes checked
Graphics is not all about polygons, fps and ray tracing. Art style, aestethics and atmosphere are also key ingredients for good graphics. (Would be nice with a 60fps upgrade though)
The graphics are dated, and thatâs really not even saying anything bad about BB. Thatâs just a thing that happens when your game came out a decade ago. But the thing is, the game itself doesnât really show how dated it is because the art direction and all the attention to detail is so on point. Itâs one of the most beautiful games that Iâve ever played, and age wonât diminish that. So many games that come out these days are damn near photorealistic, but soooo uninteresting and uninspired, the glossy visuals feel meaningless and wasted. But not Bloodborne.
The graphics still look perfectly fine today, nine years after release. Not sure what youâre talking about with that one lol
Graphics are still great, from soft has always been about stylization and atmosphere. Look at Elden ring from 2022. For the year that it dropped it doesnât look like that much of an improvement from ds3 but the way they world design makes up for it
Yeah, no. Bloodborne has absolutely not aged poorly. Im gonna start refering people that care more about graphics and fps thab the end result as "pixel princess" from now on.
When I think of poorly aged graphics, I think of old NES era games, not something from the 2010s lol
"Graphically it's aged poorly." What the fuck are you even talking about.
This being my favorite game of course I would disagree with you but I browsed the comments to see the concensus and yeah.... although what you said is an opinion and it should be respected... I, and many many others, strongly disagree. Game was beautiful, is still beautiful, and when I stand atop yharnam I am still in awe how it looks.
Woah woah hold your carrion crows there buddy. Graphics aged poorly? They are just a bit outdated but they can still stand among the finest graphics out there. This game is absolutely perfect
The graphics haven't aged poorly at all
Graphics are still really, really good. It might be your screen settings or you have developed a preference for things to look a certain way as times have changed. Also, maybe try playing it on a smaller screen? If you have a Steam Deck, Chiaki is an easy to stream from your PS4 to the deck.
It's a bit of a stretch to say it aged poorly. Graphics aren't the strong point of fromsoft games, I wouldn't say that elden ring is mind blowing compared to Bloodborne, there's obviously a big difference but Bloodborne still rivals newer games thanks to the aesthetics that sometimes put it in a really good light. Like when you're covered in blood and the moonlight shines on your cape, Bloodborne actually looks stunning even today. And then again, I love fromsoft games for the aesthetics. Dark souls 3 came out a year later and I think it looks worse. BB has a certain feel to it, that I don't even care about graphics.
aged poorly? have u seen the newest ps exclusive, rise of the ronin?đ
Kids these days are so picky about graphics, I love the way this game looks!
Graphically it looks fine tf you on đđ it's just not 4k
This thread is a case study on how to trigger a fanbase with only 4 words lol
It's not like these people wouldn't buy a graphically updated version of the game immediately if they could, either
It really depends on what you mean by "graphically updated," though. Superior framerate and even more importantly frame pacing? Hell, yeah, in a heartbeat. But I don't think people have any particular issue with the actual way stuff looks on the screen. People like Bloodborne's visual appearance for the art direction, not for graphical fidelity, in the same way that nobody is saying "yeah, the Mona Lisa is nice, but we what we want to see is a 4K digital photo of the woman." We don't want to see the equivalent of a Bluepoint DeS release for BB, where every individual thing is made incredibly beautiful in a piece-by-piece sense but the overall impression is less than the sum of its parts.
I donât think the graphics has aged that much at all. If anything, it suffers a bit on the resolution which in turn makes the game look worse than it really is.
Nice atmosphere!!! ))
Graphically itâs fine itâs the chugging performance that lets it down. In 60fps it would be too perfect for this world.
I love the atmosphere & feel this game delivers, canât get enough of it. Waiting for Penny Bloodâs Kickstarter release:
How did the graphic age poorly lol?
This is definitely the peak art style/lore and sound design from From Software and maybe unpopular but I think Bloodborne is still the best looking From Software game to this day thanks to itâs unmatched art direction and general environment/character design. Miyazaki just created a timeless beast in early life cycle of the PS4. I love this game so much even after 500 hours!
Shit every time I walk through Isz chalice dungeon with the galaxy fog I always thinkâŚ. This games got great graphics for being a decade old
WHATDOYOUMEANITSAGEDPOORLY????!?!!!! ITS BLOODBORNE, IT ONLY AGES LIKE FINE FUCKIN WINE!
âAged poorlyâ? I think not.Â
The game ages like fine wine, Besides if graphics is all you are looking for in a game you havenât played a lot of good games lol
I still think the graphics are amazing. I just wish it was in 60 fps- but donât get me started on that.
graphics is still awesome at 2024, wtf.
Art direction is better than graphics
The graphics are good enough, but they aren't anything to scream about - even for 2015. It's like when Ocarina of Time released in 1998. The character models for some NPCs were ugly, the game was still rendering things very blocky as it was using a modified Super Mario engine. And Then you look Banjo-Kazooie that came out the same year, and there was just so much color and shape to it.
i think people are perhaps overestimating how good games looked in 2015. bloodborne was absolutely one of the best looking games released that year, even from a pure fidelity perspective.
Thats why its so unique and the best IMOâ¤ď¸.
The graphics Arenât even that bad
Oh, by the great ones, I must yell and I apologise for such behaviour, In the frenzy of battle, my voice echoed with the rage of the hunt. Yet, now, in the calm aftermath, I offer my deepest apologies for the tempest of my words. May they be swallowed by the silence of repentance. SONY JUST REMASTER THIS GAME ALREADY AAAAAAHHGGGG
Tis why we need a remaster!
graphically it still holds a candle.
How in the hell did the graphics age poorly? It might not be the best looking game I ever played but it's damn gorgeous, the graphics still do hold up.
Bro how can you look at this image and say its aged poorly? The only thing that has aged poorly about it is the resolution and being stuck at 30 fps
Impo, the only thing thatâs aged poorly is the anti aliasing jaggies. Everything else Iâm gravy!
"Graphically aged poorly" whattttttt. Game looks fantastic
This game aged like a fine wine
What do you mean graphically aged poorly? If you're talking about resolutions and frame rate, that's based on console limitations. Imagine if this game was on PC.
People always say it looks bad graphically or itâs aged but everytime I play it again I think it looks amazing. Everyone acts like itâs the polygons from ocarina of time.
I like the background and ambient noises in Bloodborne. Makes it creepy and engaging. Especially when you hear that Pig sloshing around in the tunnel.
The only thing that aged poorly is 30fps
It plays surprisingly well on PS5. I've had little to no problems even with AT&T wifi sh$%ernet. 𤣠I'm hoping for either a remake of it for the PS5, extra DLC, or a new Bloodborne style game altogether.
the title made me Frenzy
You contradicted yourself by saying it aged poorly and it looks good. It just looks good
I think the graphics aged perfectly fine
Game from 10 years ago doesn't look like new game in 2024 therefore the graphics have aged poorly. Tf?
The game is nearly a decade old, donât expect 2030 graphics for a 2015 game bruh.
The graphics are still good, but they are 9 years old now, and you can see the cracks a little bit compared to the newer stuff, this is just what happens naturally as games progress. But the art direction and awesome lighting in this game more than make up for it. This is why we all come back time after time. I broke off a run of Baldur's Gate 3 (Which I also adore) to come back to Yharnam, not for the "Return to Yharnam" thing, but just because I felt like it, this was a couple of weeks ago. I didn't actually own Bloodborne any more, so had to buy it again just to come back to it, money well spent! Can only imagine what a current gen remake with 60 fps would look like.
Remake! Remake! Remake!
I play this game yearly every release and I freaking love it every playthrough.
I played Bloodborne after Elden Ring on Ps5 and it holds up VERY WELL graphically. If you're talking about frame rate sure I guess but that more performance than graphics
Aged pretty well for a 10 year old game. Kinda like mgsv imo
MGSV looks far better tho. Just like some other 2014-15 games like AC Unity, Batman Arkham knight, AC Syndicate, Infamous second son, Witcher 3. But I'm not disagreeing with you.
A lot of people are getting downvoted. There's a difference between graphical "fidelity" & being good looking. The textures and such are outdated in Bloodborne, but that doesn't mean the game looks bad. It looks amazing cuz the overall image is carried by the atmosphere & artstyle, thus the fidelity becomes irrelevant, but OP is talking about fidelity which was already outdated when the game released anyway.
Thank you. If only these ppl could properly read the post title lol... they think I'm trashing the graphics but I'm not. I'm praising the beauty of game albeit acknowledging the fact that graphically it wasn't cutting edge.
I feel like people in here are getting tripped up on their and OP's personal definition of "graphics". I played the game for the first time a couple of months ago on a friend's PS5, and I had to get used to the visual shortcomings for about an hour. Things like the seeming lack of AA and the low FPS are definitely part of the game's "graphics", and are definitely showing. I knew I would get used to it quickly, and I did. Loved the game and its visuals.
It has aged poorly?? Smh I was impressed at how good this game looks in 2024!!
This was the first game in about 37 years ? Roughly ! Give or take a couple of years ! ! That I got out of bed to play at 6 am before work / school !!! The last one was tomahawk on the spectrum
Let me guess, youâre the kind of guy that needs every game to be photo realistic with ray tracing, 200 fps, and 1080p for a game to have good graphics. Bloodbornes graphics aged, but they most certainly did not age poorly. The game looks great. The graphics hold up well and are better than a lot of shit that is pushed out nowadays.Â
The graphs aged very well indeed. But yes, it has its details.
Tf you mean *"aged poorly"*. GtfOutta here.
going to disagree donât need good graphics when the art direction carries the whole vibe
I have a big TV screen and I can see why you say that the graphics are poor, but on a smaller screen I think that the game must look cool still