Dark Souls for PC: Petition

[Korten12]

But as I said, PC Gamers don't seem to want Dark Souls, they just want another game they can Mod because apparently Vanilla isn't good enough.

I don't think you understand why PC gamers mod games.

First off, most PC gamers will not use mods on their first playthrough of a game (aside from maybe graphics mods or unofficial patches) because most of them DO want to play the game the way the developers intended.

Most PC gamers will only start modding after they have finished a game in order to keep subsequent playthroughs fresh and interesting . The fact that the game won't be exactly the same as the last time you played it gives a lot of motivation to play the game again, thus greatly increasing its lifespan.

However, most PC gamers won't get to the point of heavily modding the game unless they enjoy the game the developers created. Modding isn't a sign of dissatisfaction with the product, but instead a great passion for it.

I'm not saying that there should be mods for a theoretical PC version of Dark Souls. I've never played the game, and therefore have no idea how well mods would work in the game. But I thought you should understand why people would want mods for this.

Well the thing is that Dark Souls doesn't end when you beat it. You go to NG+ immediatly and you continue going on as the game gets increasingly more difficult. But the thing is that Dark Souls doesn't lend itself to modding.

There is no large open area's like Skyrim where you can find somewhere with nothing and add like a Castle. Dark Souls while you can go exploring is tightly crafted and there is no extra.

That's totally okay. A lot of games don't lend themselves well to modding, and they aren't any worse because of it.

I think a lot of people have the idea that because this game is an RPG, it would be very moddable. This isn't an unreasonable assumption, as a large amount of RPGs have great mods. People that haven't played the game (which probably a majority of the people asking for the PC version) are unlikely to know how the game works, and why it would be an exception to the RPGs being great for modding rule.

Your a good person. I think your one of the few that understand.

 

[Bat Vader]

wrong. there is obviously hosting. just because it's automated in the p2p system doesn't mean there is no hosting. things like that are not hard to mod. it wouldn't take modders long to create a fully functional mods. of course, only people who actually have and run the mod can play in this alternate version of the game.
mw2 for example has "no hosting", as you call it, still there is alter iw net with mods and everything.

i don't think you understand what a mod is. a mod is not a change on MY game, with wich i then proceed to play with people who have the unmodded game. think of it more as of an fan-made addon to the game. only people who run the mod play together.

You don't understand. THERE IS HOSTING. What do you think that you connect to? you have to connect to a server. It doesn't matter that you can't host a game, it still has to be hosted by From. They could just use the solutions above on their master server, so that people can use mods in single player, and not multiplayer.

[Yes

And the fact you dont get a server list doesn't change it isn't a singler server system. When you play you host and if you decide to invade, then you log on them hosting.

The fact that it doesn't say "host game" doesn't change that how the mechanics of it work. game you play isn't hosted off site. It is hosted on site unless you invade. Portal system.

get with the program. Only real barrier for the PC is that the locally hosted data is subject to change by the owner because the PC is open where as the console isn't.

I don't think you guys get what I mean by hosting. What I mean is that, you don't start a server. You're always online even if you aren't playing with other players. Yes, you host when you invite people to your game, but you don't start your own server to regulate between players who are modded and not. Which is why modding would break it.

And you dont understand how it works.

No1 has said it will be like hosting a TF2 server, yet you still host the game. You simply dont know what you are talking about. You can easily set it up with mods and a portal system. I mentioned multiple examples where they have done it. Mods are a non issue.

You just need to make a single standardised portal for multiplayer. And you need to do that for any type of multiplayer. Its a non-problem. I dont know how many times i can keep explaining the same thing and you keep getting it wrong.

Yet you keep saying Portal System but you don't EXPLAIN HOW IT WOULD WORK. How would you regulate Modders and such? Explain to me that.

But as I said, PC Gamers don't seem to want Dark Souls, they just want another game they can Mod because apparently Vanilla isn't good enough.

We do want Dark Souls. Just because someone makes a mod for it does not stop it from being Dark Souls. I don't see why modding the game is a bad thing. If someone can improve upon an already good game that is just an added bonus.

 

[Zakarrum]

So from my understanding there are plenty of console enthusiasts who are saying that pc gamers should only get the game if they get it as the devs intended i.e. the vanilla version with no added bonuses.

That is total BULLSHIT. You guys are saying that consumers should not get what they want from a company whose goal it is to please consumers, and thats it. When it comes down to it companies exist to PLEASE consumers and do as the consumers bid, not the other way around. If it were the other way around what a sad world we would be living in.

If PC gamers want to be able to mod it, quicksaves, and extra hotkeys they should be able to get it, just because the devs developed the game with console limitations in mind doesn't mean that the PC version should get shafted. The PC is objectively technically superior to consoles and there is no denying that and when the game is ported the PC version should get its extra perks because it is what the consumers want, it doesn't matter what the devs want what matters is what the consumer wants.

Just because you guys are playing on a technically inferior platform doesn't mean you need to drag down the rest of us with you. If Blizz found a way to port D3 or SC2 to consoles I'd be happy because that many more people would be able to play some of the best games the industry has to offer, but the fact of the matter is many games are pc exclusive because of console limitations. As for indie pc exclusives they are exclusives because they cannot afford to distribute their games to console consumers because digital distribution is very limited there.

 

[Hobonicus]

So because you can't have what you want, I shouldn't be allowed to have what I want? Do you see how silly and immature that sounds? Is this truly a competition? What did I ever do to you?
.

No it means "Pc's aren't automatically better than consoles", so asking me why I wouldn't want to play the game with better framerates etc doesn't convince me, since for myself (and many people) that's not an option.

Read my posts, my issue with this is that it wouldn't work the other way around. If I made a petition to get say...Magicka (which was even designed with the 360 controls in mind) onto the xbox how easily do you think it would happen? Would someone like TB back me up? HELL NO. If PC gammers where willing to do this I wouldn't have an issue doing the same back, the problem is that isn't the case at all.

What's actually happening is that some PC gamers have gone "Whaa, we want to play/mod that game without getting a console, let's complain to the devs until they do it".

But I still see the same problem. You generalize an entire group as "PC gamers" and hold against them the idea that they wouldn't rally to your cause. It's not simply that you won't help, it's that you're against the idea because some non-organized category of people wouldn't do the same for you. In other words, "I can't get what I want so neither can you."

It could very well be that a PC to console port wouldn't get the same support, but why does that influence your decision? This isn't a competition, we're all ultimately on the same side and we all just want to play the best possible games we can. If you wanted a game like Magicka (which does seem like it would work great on a console), nobody reasonable is gonna vote against you. Inaction is nothing to take such offense from.

And if your response is simply just "I don't really care enough to bother because it doesn't affect me and I have no obligation to help that crowd" that's fine. But if instead your response is "I won't support them because they're elitists who wouldn't support me" then that's a problem.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Well, all this thread has taught me is that a lot of people don't know the difference between 'technical' and 'technological'.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

As well as that many have said it is more than possible to use a controller on PC. I have one for my PC that is basically a PS 2 controller and that is not including the fact you can use 360 controller too. Even reconfiguring controlls is the job of a port.

I use a Ps3 afterglow controller on mine. Works wonderfully.

Also, that last thing you said, about controls being part of porting, tell that to the creators of Bionic commando please. They refuse to accept that I was playing on PC and not 360.

Well that is quite unfortunate I never played Bionic Commando so I don't know what they are like on either version but the people who do the port should be trying to tailor the controls to whatever platform they are porting it on.

The only thing that really lets companies down here is when they don't let you change the controls in a port. An example of this would be Transformers War For Cybertron. The thing that is bad about this is if the controls are awkwardly place you can change them to somewhere better.

 

[Skin]

That is total BULLSHIT. You guys are saying that consumers should not get what they want from a company whose goal it is to please consumers, and thats it.

You know a doctor is not obligated to see any patients. They can pick and choose their patients, even though they would not be raking in as much cash, they have control over who they wish to serve.

All companies are the same. Do not think for a second the customer is always right, because if this was the case, the world would stop - you cannot please everyone. The developers COULD release a Dark Souls version for PC and rake in some more cash, but if they don't want to, they shouldn't have to. They have already hit their primary market in console gamers and porting the game to the PC is a gamble and one they don't want to take.

 

[SextusMaximus]

I'd almost certainly buy if it came to PC! So I guess I'll sign!

 

[-Samurai-]

So, his only point was "People who primarily play games on a PC would probably enjoy it, so they should get it.".

I bet people that primarily game on an NES would probably enjoy it, too. PETITION TO HAVE DARK SOULS MADE FOR NES!!

I really couldn't care less about your choice of platform or why you chose it, but if you want a company to spend money on something for you, you've got to come up with a better reason than "I think people will buy it and like it.".

I don't think there needs to be any more reason than that, if people buy it they make lots of money from it and if people like it there's a chance they'll earn fans who will spend hundreds more on their other games.

A few too many ifs in there to be worth the money it would take to port and tweak it for PC.

Companies don't take risks and hope they'll make some money. They take the sure thing and make tons of money. Porting Dark Souls to PC isn't a guaranteed win for them. A few thousand signatures on an internet filled with a few thousand of signatures for other things won't change that.

At the moment of writing this over 27,000 people have said they want the game and if it was sold at a base price of £35 that means Namco Bandai would make over £950,000; and this is just day two of the petition.

27,000 signatures =/= 27,000 guaranteed sales. Plenty of people in this thread signed while stating that they're not getting it. Then there are the people that can't afford it, and the people that just decide they don't want it when it comes out.

27,000 signatures may as well be none, because none of them are guarantees.

Do you know anything about business? It's called market research, maybe everyone won't buy the game but it's a good fucking estimate.

If we lived by the logic 'if it's not guaranteed don't try it' we'd still be living in caves without even the benefit of fire because trying to start one might not work so it's not worth even trying.

Market research?! What that be?

Is that where a company has a group of people that try to figure out wether or not a product/service will be profitable based on things like current trends and competitor sales of similar products/services(along with various other factors)? Or is it where a group of people on the internet sign a petition in hopes of getting what they want?

One of those things is market research. The other isn't. Hint: It's not the second one.

That petition isn't market research any more than my ass is a coconut.

And as for your cave man example: You sorta missed the point.

The point isn't "Oh it might not work.". It's "There's a very good chance that we'll take a loss not worth taking.".

I'm sure you'd be happy to fund the port yourself and eat the potential loss.

If it doesn't sell as many copies for PC as it did for consoles, they won't automatically lose money, they just make less.

They'd lose money from the cost it paid to port it. Selling less on PC won't mean they made less from console sales. They made the same amount regardless of how the PC one would sell. If a PC port wouldn't make the amount of money it took to port it, it's a loss.

Anyway, I'm just gonna leave this one be. Between the "I'm not elitist, you're elitist!" bullshit, and the "Here are my made up statistics/opinions that prove how well this would do." bullshit, there doesn't seem to be much room for understanding how a business works, the way the game industry works, or the way current trends work, and why porting it is a bad idea regardless of how many signatures the petition gets.

Let's face it. By the time a PC port hit the market, you'd all have forgotten about this completely and moved on to the next big thing you want on Machine X.

 

[Joccaren]

That is total BULLSHIT. You guys are saying that consumers should not get what they want from a company whose goal it is to please consumers, and thats it.

You know a doctor is not obligated to see any patients. They can pick and choose their patients, even though they would not be raking in as much cash, they have control over who they wish to serve.

All companies are the same. Do not think for a second the customer is always right, because if this was the case, the world would stop - you cannot please everyone. The developers COULD release a Dark Souls version for PC and rake in some more cash, but if they don't want to, they shouldn't have to. They have already hit their primary market in console gamers and porting the game to the PC is a gamble and one they don't want to take.

Agreed, though I think he is taking more offence at the fact console owners are saying the devs SHOULDN'T give PC gamers what they want, simply out of spite. Honestly, it is the devs decision, and just how well a game will do does ride on these sorts of things. Add in some form of modding, you attract a whole new crowd of people who want to see what they can change in the game to make it harder, easier, shinier, bigger, ect.
If the devs want to forgo that, that is fine and it is their decision, but nobody needs to be saying that they downright shouldn't try to give PC gamers extra features.

Honestly, this thread is turning into the Youtube of the Escapist in many ways. A war over which is better: PC or console - this time it seems largely aggravated by console players. There are numerous good reasons for console players to be on this thread. Sadly, it presently seems so that they can try to bash PC gamers for no reason - something which is truly quite low.
The flame war needs to stop - on both sides. Live and let be, what happens with Dark Souls is not your's to decide. PC gamers (And very nice console players <3) Have an opportunity to push for the game to be released on the PC, whilst the final decision rests with the company itself. Those who don't want it released on the PC have no reason to be on this thread, as it is for supporting our fellow gamers, not trying to get one back at those 'PC Elitists' who wronged you in the past.

 

[Kathinka]

But as I said, PC Gamers don't seem to want Dark Souls, they just want another game they can Mod because apparently Vanilla isn't good enough.

I don't think you understand why PC gamers mod games.

First off, most PC gamers will not use mods on their first playthrough of a game (aside from maybe graphics mods or unofficial patches) because most of them DO want to play the game the way the developers intended.

Most PC gamers will only start modding after they have finished a game in order to keep subsequent playthroughs fresh and interesting . The fact that the game won't be exactly the same as the last time you played it gives a lot of motivation to play the game again, thus greatly increasing its lifespan.

However, most PC gamers won't get to the point of heavily modding the game unless they enjoy the game the developers created. Modding isn't a sign of dissatisfaction with the product, but instead a great passion for it.

I'm not saying that there should be mods for a theoretical PC version of Dark Souls. I've never played the game, and therefore have no idea how well mods would work in the game. But I thought you should understand why people would want mods for this.

Well the thing is that Dark Souls doesn't end when you beat it. You go to NG+ immediatly and you continue going on as the game gets increasingly more difficult. But the thing is that Dark Souls doesn't lend itself to modding.

There is no large open area's like Skyrim where you can find somewhere with nothing and add like a Castle. Dark Souls while you can go exploring is tightly crafted and there is no extra.

then why not create a mod for a large free roaming area? it really seems like you don't understand what modding is. a mod could be extra campains, new interesting game play elements, or total conversion, like, for example, a campain in the second world war or whatever. or something that uses the engine but plays very different alltogether. ever heard of something called "counterstrike" perhaps?
not every game is skyrim. "modding" doesn't neccessarely mean "slap some more dungeons on it". it would most likely be a complete seperate campain to run, if it ever were to happen.

 

[soes757]

Why do you want it on PC? So we can hear the PC fanboys complain about more "console ports"? If you spend large amounts of money on a comp built for gaming you're just going to have to accept that not every game is going to be available. The console fans accept this (hell they have to considering how many games are PC exclusive) so why can the PC fans suck it up and do the same?

No, they don't accept it.
They want everything to come out on the consoles.

 

[Korten12]

So there's no servers for Dark Souls...

Then why would they have this article:

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/09/22/atlus-continues-demons-souls-server-support-into-2012/

Yes I know it's for Demon Souls, but the same idea would be that From Software have a bunch of servers that everyone is connecting to to get spawned into other people's games as ghosts/aids/invasions/etc.

You COULD have mods and the server COULD tell if you had mods enabled or not and therefore NOT let you invade/aid other players due to your mods that you've enabled and it would work fine.

That was Demon's Souls, Dark Souls uses Peer to Peer.

 

[Jesus Phish]

snip

[more snip]

That's not really how mods work, that's more how cheating works. Mods could make the game easier, harder, better looking, smoother running, better sounding etc etc

If a pvp server was set up with one hit kills, everyone playing would be doing one hit kills not just one dude who modded himself a really nice weapon which he then decided to drop and it was picked up by some other dude

Better looking mods are fine. Difficutly shouldn't be changed because as you beat the game it get's harder.

You don't understand though, you don't pick your server. You go online and play with everyone. That's the whole point of the online, if you could pick up yuor server, then the community would be broken up.

The game is meant to played online so then people at any time can invade your game or you invite them to yours. Mods that change any aspect of this, would break it.

Well ok, look at MMOs. Look at WoW. That has lots of mods for the UI, for fighting bosses (displaying information) for bgs etc etc. How many people have modded WoW to include a weapon only they have and gotten it onto a real server?

 

[LilithSlave]

I'd be more happy if games I cared more about like Tales of Symphonia/Abyss/Xillia/Phantasia/ect. or Klonoa or Tekken came to PC. But it sounds like a step in the right direction.

Of all of the third party Japanese companies that are afraid of the PC platform, Namco seems the most afraid. There's pretty much nothing by them for PC. At least Square throws people a tiny bone with games like Last Remnant, Capcom an even bigger bone with Street Fighter IV, Resident Evil 4, Silent Hill: Homecoming, Sega with a whole bunch of their stuff...

But Namco is completely lacking in the PC department even worse than SEGA and Capcom. I'd be so happy if I started seeing loads of jRPGs like Tales of for the PC. Wish people would get behind more games for the PC. But most PC gamers I've come across do not respect Asian games.

So yeah, I'll sign and buy if it comes to PC.