Here's my theory: fixing the resolution causes computers to literally melt during Blighttown.
Seems unlikely, but less far fetched than OP's theory.
Seems unlikely, but less far fetched than OP's theory.
The Dark Souls PC version controversy.
- Thread starter Stavros Dimou
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Oh don't worry about. Prepare to Die will hurt Namco's wallet, not From's. The sales of the PC will affect the chances of Souls 3 being on the PC. The first two were big enough hits on consoles that there's not much to be worried about.Westaway said:
Don't join the herd by ridiculousness as well. A bad port is a bad port which this is. Unlocking frames and resolution is pretty standard. While I'm glad they tossed us a bone, doesn't mean I won't call them out on the flaws of it or nothing would get better in this industry.Witty Name Here said:
Oh good lord, the unjust travesty!! The graphics aren't sooper dooper clear, quick someone call the internet police!!! If something isn't done fast I....I think the internet might break or something you guise...I'm sooper cereal about this.
Because 30 FPS on a television is not the same as 30 FPS on a monitor. They don't work images the same way. In addition, on my laptop I am sitting right by the screen, while on a console you are generally across the room. Even mild choppiness is greatly noticeable. When I am playing New Vegas with all my graphics mods and occasionally the frame rate dips from 50-60 to around 30-40, I instantly notice. When I tried LA Noire, a game with a locked frame rate, the animations looked really off to me. If you are used to 60+ FPS on a monitor, you will REALLY notice, and it won't look or feel right when playing.Witty Name Here said:
And for us PC gamers, it's not just the FPS thing. It's being forced to use a controller, being forced to use Games for Windows Live (a truly awful service, has caused me a lot of problems in the past), having the resolution locked at a lower level (I have a 1920x1080 monitor, being forced to play 1080x720 would make it look AWFUL and hurts my eyes), a higher price than the console version (it's $29.99 for a new copy at Gamestop, $39.99 on PC), AND the FPS lock. Most of these are the most basic of features. Even low budget indie games have them. Free to play games have them. There is zero reason that a company with the game already made and a team behind it couldn't do it. If they don't know how, get people to port it who do. Given that it's taken a matter of hours for some of the hours to get fixed, it's clearly not a huge hassle. If the methods to fix these things are easy to apply, such as changing .ini files, then I'll eventually get the game on a Steam sale. However, I will not pay full price for a bad port. It's not being spoiled or, as people like to say, "entitled". It's expecting a product I am supposed to pay for to work like other products should. I wouldn't buy a car without working air conditioning or adjustable seats, I will not buy a game that lacks basic PC gaming features. I don't care if they "didn't have to do it". They didn't do it to be nice, they did it because there's demand and they want to make money. I am not obligated to give it to them.
This is just downright ridiculous. As the OP mentions in HIS OWN DAMN OPENING POST the dev team said they didn't have a lot of experience with working on the PC. So then, let's ask the question, which is more likely?
A: The dastardly development team of a AAA game intentionally sabotaged their own software in some sort of hair-brained Harrison Bergeron type scheme, and then lied about how incompetent they were to throw everyone off their tracks.
or
B: The development team that wasn't used to working for the PC overlooked a fix that they didn't know about in the process of doing something that they hadn't done before.
I'm not a betting man, but if I was, I know where I'd put my money.
Pro Tip: Human error is always a safe bet.
A: The dastardly development team of a AAA game intentionally sabotaged their own software in some sort of hair-brained Harrison Bergeron type scheme, and then lied about how incompetent they were to throw everyone off their tracks.
or
B: The development team that wasn't used to working for the PC overlooked a fix that they didn't know about in the process of doing something that they hadn't done before.
I'm not a betting man, but if I was, I know where I'd put my money.
Pro Tip: Human error is always a safe bet.
This is not an average port, simply because every other recent port has been way, way better. Go play Darksiders 2 and Sleeping Dogs on PC and tell me it's the same as Dark Souls.Witty Name Here said:
And we're not even talking about textures and graphical doodads here. Supporting native resolutions and and fps over 30 is basic stuff that has been the standard since the last decade. Shit, they didn't even bother with changing the key prompts in menus and hints. I'm pretty sure people would complain if the console version of TW2 prompted you to press LMB/RMB and WASD.
And accepting the scaling back of graphics on consoles doesn't you mean you appreciate the fun of games more, it means you're not idiots. No developer is able provide the same graphical fidelity as an up-to-date PC on a console, it comes with the territory.
While the standard for PC ports, as low as it is, is still much higher than what From Software provided.
EDIT: Just to clarify, I don't think this is a conspiracy, just complete incompetence. And I think Dark Souls "fans" are doing From a disservice by defending them in this.
The difference with The Witcher 2 is that they HAD to scales down because consoles were physically incapable of handling it. If they didn't, you couldn't play it. With Dark Souls on the other hand, they left out features that are standard on PC, that even the worst of console ports tend to have. Lack of FPS locks, resolution options, mouse and keyboard support, are all what we expect from a PC game. If the Witcher 2 required you to buy a mouse and keyboard for your console to play it, you can bet your ass people would have been crying about it. Much in the same way you expect console games to use everything your console offers, so do we. If I saw a car on sale that looked good and drove well, but didn't have an air conditioner, the windows don't roll down, and the mirrors couldn't be adjusted, would I be stupid and entitled for saying I don't want to buy it?Witty Name Here said:
Well you have pushed that boat just a little bit too far and then off a cliff, if they were worried about jealousy then you wouldn't be getting the extra content and the game at $40.
It is a simple matter of lazy ports, because adding the extra options takes time and effort they rather just say "it has some issues" and not do the work.
And that is why it's sensible to wait and see what the port is really like, possibly get more enthusiasts fixing it before you take the plunge.
As for those "how dare you demand quality products" people hanging around... just because you don't have standards doesn't mean everyone shouldn't, if you had the decency to speak out against bad products then we would have higher quality by default.
It is a simple matter of lazy ports, because adding the extra options takes time and effort they rather just say "it has some issues" and not do the work.
And that is why it's sensible to wait and see what the port is really like, possibly get more enthusiasts fixing it before you take the plunge.
As for those "how dare you demand quality products" people hanging around... just because you don't have standards doesn't mean everyone shouldn't, if you had the decency to speak out against bad products then we would have higher quality by default.
Witty Name Here said:
You don't seem to get it. Consoles get scaled down versions because it's physically impossible to run them at an acceptable level with graphics set to PC standards. This would be like complaining my motorcycle doesn't get the latest tow hitches.
It's not a matter of deserving an FPS of 60. PC games get a FPS of WHATEVER THEY GET. The only thing that will limit the FPS of a proper PC game is the hardware of the computer. Some games get hundreds and hundreds of frames, because they don't tax the PC very much (see older 2D games). This is why we have graphical settings to let us adjust how comfortable we are with the performance. This isn't entitled, this has been standard practice for almost two decades. The reason this game only gets 30 is because they didn't remove the lock they put in so consoles wouldn't melt when trying to look at more than the floor.
This is a sign of a shit port when it takes a single person a couple hours to fix an obvious problem after the game has been worked on for months by a development crew.
Of course, since From is more worried that people who already bought the product MAY feel a little jealous than they are trying to bring in a new audience and get more money. Totally, it's not like they're a business or anything.
I don't know the full details about what problems the port is facing, so I'm willing to believe that the complaints that people bring up may be legitimate, but when it comes to the point where you come up with a half-baked conspiracy than I'm just going to disregard what you actually have to say. Considering the plethora of sensible reasons why the game may be "console-downed", it's kind of hard to see how intentionally dicking PC gamers to appease console users is even close to a first thought.
I don't know the full details about what problems the port is facing, so I'm willing to believe that the complaints that people bring up may be legitimate, but when it comes to the point where you come up with a half-baked conspiracy than I'm just going to disregard what you actually have to say. Considering the plethora of sensible reasons why the game may be "console-downed", it's kind of hard to see how intentionally dicking PC gamers to appease console users is even close to a first thought.
Why can't all we be serious and discuss based on the facts and instead there have to be posts making fun of other members ?
The game had locked resolution,and it wasn't a big deal to make resolutions choosable.
That's a fact,it's not a conspiracy theory neither "hate". Since when stating facts became hating ? You mean that for someone to not be a hater he should overlook all bad points of something and only present the good ones,pretending that everything is OK while it isn't ?
@burningdragon: People have already visited this place and there is no problem with altered resolution. In no event a modern computer would have problems running a game like Dark Souls or any other xbox360/ps3 game.
@Witty Name Here: I didn't say it's a conspiracy and I don't get why you over-exaggerate about it. You say that PC gamers DOESN'T DESERVE such a game. You seem to be ignorant. Please take in mind that the console versions of Dark Souls where up to the current modern standards of each console. This wasn't parallel to the PC version of the game,which isn't up to modern standards.
This isn't whining for asking an enhanced and improved product,but it's asking for a product that is functional and up to the modern standards. "Improved" is different from "Functional".
The proportional of the PC version's sub-standard nature would be if the PS3 version of the game came in 15 cds instead of 1 blu-ray. Wouldn't a choice like that make you wonder at least, if not frustrated ?
I guess when people said they wanted to play the game,they expected that it would be at least on par with the majority of console ports like Call of Duty and Skyrim,and I don't think anybody expected the developer to actually care enough to implement platform-specific optimization like Battlefield 3 and and Crysis 2 had. But what happened is striking as it's the first time things like that ever happen on this platform.
You have to realize that when something is happening for the first time it's going to surprise people since it will be the first time they have given experience.
Imagine if a game came to the console you have and in order to play it you would have to install 15 cds on your hard drive,and buy extra hardware seperetaly like keyboard + mouse,and have it play only on standard resolution tvs and thus being unplayable at your HDTV.
How would you feel about such a game,honestly ?
So you are saying that PC gamers doesn't deserve Dark Souls.
I think you are wrong. I think what PC gamers doesn't deserve is bad porting,not Dark Souls.
What strikes me is that you judge and discriminate people,based on their taste of liking something or not,which is extremely chauvinist.
Nobody said he doesn't like Dark Souls. Nobody said he doesn't like its ganmeplay,its leveling system,its combat system,its aesthetics,its music,its sound effects,its story,its atmosphere,or its graphics.
What people complain are things like these:
*In order to play the game on your computer you have to have 2 other programs pre-installed,Steam and Games For Windows Live,and GFWL is a bugged bloatware that half times works,half times it doesn't.
*In the Official Requirements List there is no gamepad listed,yet the game requires a gamepad to be played,which means the stated requirements are misleading.
*The game was destined by its developers to be played at a low resolution even if it is absolutely doable to play it at higher resolutions,and it only takes 5 minutes to configure it,denying PC users a fundamental standard of ALL PC SOFTWARE,not only games.
*The game was destined by its developers to limit the FPS count,even if there is absolutely no reason for doing something like that.
These aspects have nothing to do with Dark Souls as for its game design. Nobody complained about how Dark Souls plays as a game. People actually complain about decisions that if they where not taken would make the game far more enjoyable,and have nothing to do with the game's design itself.
And nobody asked for enhancements. Nobody asked better textures,or DOF,or tesselation,or other things that would be considered pluses. PC gamers would be OK if the game had no additional enhancements at all,but it would at least have the quality as the 99% of the rest of the games that get ported from the consoles to PCs,like Skyrim,Mass Effect,Call of Duty,Sleeping Dogs,Need for Speed series,Arkham City/Asylum... Nobody "whined" for these games,and all of these where made for consoles and where ported to PCs. The point is the port of Dark Souls doesn't hold up to the standards of the rest ported games,the industry standards. If the porting quality of DS was in par with the rest of the ports nobody would have complained. But what we are dealing here with is a first time ever situation where a game just ignores competition and industry standards,and comes with awkward decisions like the caps.
It's the first time ever this is happening,so it's a record downgrade of gaming standards,that's why the Dark Souls port topic is "hot".
The game had locked resolution,and it wasn't a big deal to make resolutions choosable.
That's a fact,it's not a conspiracy theory neither "hate". Since when stating facts became hating ? You mean that for someone to not be a hater he should overlook all bad points of something and only present the good ones,pretending that everything is OK while it isn't ?
@burningdragon: People have already visited this place and there is no problem with altered resolution. In no event a modern computer would have problems running a game like Dark Souls or any other xbox360/ps3 game.
@Witty Name Here: I didn't say it's a conspiracy and I don't get why you over-exaggerate about it. You say that PC gamers DOESN'T DESERVE such a game. You seem to be ignorant. Please take in mind that the console versions of Dark Souls where up to the current modern standards of each console. This wasn't parallel to the PC version of the game,which isn't up to modern standards.
This isn't whining for asking an enhanced and improved product,but it's asking for a product that is functional and up to the modern standards. "Improved" is different from "Functional".
The proportional of the PC version's sub-standard nature would be if the PS3 version of the game came in 15 cds instead of 1 blu-ray. Wouldn't a choice like that make you wonder at least, if not frustrated ?
I guess when people said they wanted to play the game,they expected that it would be at least on par with the majority of console ports like Call of Duty and Skyrim,and I don't think anybody expected the developer to actually care enough to implement platform-specific optimization like Battlefield 3 and and Crysis 2 had. But what happened is striking as it's the first time things like that ever happen on this platform.
You have to realize that when something is happening for the first time it's going to surprise people since it will be the first time they have given experience.
Imagine if a game came to the console you have and in order to play it you would have to install 15 cds on your hard drive,and buy extra hardware seperetaly like keyboard + mouse,and have it play only on standard resolution tvs and thus being unplayable at your HDTV.
How would you feel about such a game,honestly ?
So you are saying that PC gamers doesn't deserve Dark Souls.
I think you are wrong. I think what PC gamers doesn't deserve is bad porting,not Dark Souls.
What strikes me is that you judge and discriminate people,based on their taste of liking something or not,which is extremely chauvinist.
Nobody said he doesn't like Dark Souls. Nobody said he doesn't like its ganmeplay,its leveling system,its combat system,its aesthetics,its music,its sound effects,its story,its atmosphere,or its graphics.
What people complain are things like these:
*In order to play the game on your computer you have to have 2 other programs pre-installed,Steam and Games For Windows Live,and GFWL is a bugged bloatware that half times works,half times it doesn't.
*In the Official Requirements List there is no gamepad listed,yet the game requires a gamepad to be played,which means the stated requirements are misleading.
*The game was destined by its developers to be played at a low resolution even if it is absolutely doable to play it at higher resolutions,and it only takes 5 minutes to configure it,denying PC users a fundamental standard of ALL PC SOFTWARE,not only games.
*The game was destined by its developers to limit the FPS count,even if there is absolutely no reason for doing something like that.
These aspects have nothing to do with Dark Souls as for its game design. Nobody complained about how Dark Souls plays as a game. People actually complain about decisions that if they where not taken would make the game far more enjoyable,and have nothing to do with the game's design itself.
And nobody asked for enhancements. Nobody asked better textures,or DOF,or tesselation,or other things that would be considered pluses. PC gamers would be OK if the game had no additional enhancements at all,but it would at least have the quality as the 99% of the rest of the games that get ported from the consoles to PCs,like Skyrim,Mass Effect,Call of Duty,Sleeping Dogs,Need for Speed series,Arkham City/Asylum... Nobody "whined" for these games,and all of these where made for consoles and where ported to PCs. The point is the port of Dark Souls doesn't hold up to the standards of the rest ported games,the industry standards. If the porting quality of DS was in par with the rest of the ports nobody would have complained. But what we are dealing here with is a first time ever situation where a game just ignores competition and industry standards,and comes with awkward decisions like the caps.
It's the first time ever this is happening,so it's a record downgrade of gaming standards,that's why the Dark Souls port topic is "hot".
Gabe Newell has made several comments aimed at Windows 8 that shows his dissatisfaction for the product and how it is a disaster for and possibly end PC gaming.StriderShinryu said:
http://www.webpronews.com/windows-8-trashed-by-gabe-newell-again-2012-08
This comes from a man who amicably left Microsoft, the company that made him a millionaire and with his friend and co-worker Mike Harrington used the fortune he made from it to start their own company VALVe.
If that's the case, why is Gabe Newell talking about converting the entire Steam library to work with Linux? Why did he just recently run a test with Left 4 Dead 2 in Linux (finding out it runs better than in Windows) if he has no intention of migrating to Linux?yuval152 said:
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/23315
http://www.techhive.com/article/2000260/valve-makes-left-for-dead-2-faster-on-linux-than-on-windows.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/02/valve_games_faster_on_linux/
It's not because someone is nice. It's because some developers feel Windows 8 is too restrictive.
With the way the mechanics are set up, I honestly cannot fathom why anyone would WANT to use keyboard and mouse to play this game. I always pull out the 360 controller for third person games, especially ones ported from consoles, because that was their initial design and vision for the mechanics and gameplay. The controller mapping for the souls games are elegant and that's why you should use a controller for it.
PC gaming is about choice, and everything that comes with an open platform. From did their best to make the keyboard a control method, despite it being a terribly inefficient way to play the game. The magic is that you can use a KB/M, 360 controller, PS3 controller, Wiimote, or even a damnned SNES controller with a USB adapter if you feel so inclined. I didn't enjoy Dead Space at all until I used a PS3 controller, and everything clicked at that point.
PC games don't have standards, there are games that have set certain standards, but not every title that follows has to go down the checklist to ensure that it has met or exceeded what came before it in order to be enjoyed on it's own merits, especially if it's a game birthed on a console by a Japanese team of 200 people who were given a ludicrous amount of time to learn an entire atmosphere of game design that was entirely foreign to them.
And they did it. It loads, doesn't crash, doesn't BSOD, or require 10 1 Gig patches in order to run correctly, and they gave exactly what was PETITIONED of them and nothing less. And just like Oblivion, Skyrim, FO3, FONV, and others, the community is already embracing what they were given and are making it a perfect vision of what they expected instead of insulting those who spent 18 hour days giving them anything to work with at all.
I'm going back to Prepare to Die right now, I thought I would alt-tab into excitement that a whole segment of the gaming community is finally experiencing one of the best damned action-RPGs ever crafted, regardless of its FPS, shaders, or fucking input requirements. I'm almost ashamed to have pride in the PC and the opportunities it offers, because apparently it has do or die exacting standards to constantly remind console users that they fucked up and they're missing out, and this just isn't one of the examples yet. I wonder if some of you are old enough to remember Daikatana and other abominations that just plain didn't function on even a basic level. That's something to complain about.
EDIT: Not to be self serving, and I hope it's not against the rules, but here's a post where I talk to myself about Prepare to Die in general and covers more on this issue: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.386059-So-has-anyone-pre-ordered-Dark-Souls-on-Steam#15376296
If you don't feel like it, it's with noting that this isn't a direct 1:1 port of the console game. They've made some modifications that have been obvious so far and I truly believe it is the definitive version of the game. Hell, until I have a child I probably won't love anything as much as I'm loving this game, and I'm on NG+3 on the PS3.
PC gaming is about choice, and everything that comes with an open platform. From did their best to make the keyboard a control method, despite it being a terribly inefficient way to play the game. The magic is that you can use a KB/M, 360 controller, PS3 controller, Wiimote, or even a damnned SNES controller with a USB adapter if you feel so inclined. I didn't enjoy Dead Space at all until I used a PS3 controller, and everything clicked at that point.
PC games don't have standards, there are games that have set certain standards, but not every title that follows has to go down the checklist to ensure that it has met or exceeded what came before it in order to be enjoyed on it's own merits, especially if it's a game birthed on a console by a Japanese team of 200 people who were given a ludicrous amount of time to learn an entire atmosphere of game design that was entirely foreign to them.
And they did it. It loads, doesn't crash, doesn't BSOD, or require 10 1 Gig patches in order to run correctly, and they gave exactly what was PETITIONED of them and nothing less. And just like Oblivion, Skyrim, FO3, FONV, and others, the community is already embracing what they were given and are making it a perfect vision of what they expected instead of insulting those who spent 18 hour days giving them anything to work with at all.
I'm going back to Prepare to Die right now, I thought I would alt-tab into excitement that a whole segment of the gaming community is finally experiencing one of the best damned action-RPGs ever crafted, regardless of its FPS, shaders, or fucking input requirements. I'm almost ashamed to have pride in the PC and the opportunities it offers, because apparently it has do or die exacting standards to constantly remind console users that they fucked up and they're missing out, and this just isn't one of the examples yet. I wonder if some of you are old enough to remember Daikatana and other abominations that just plain didn't function on even a basic level. That's something to complain about.
EDIT: Not to be self serving, and I hope it's not against the rules, but here's a post where I talk to myself about Prepare to Die in general and covers more on this issue: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.386059-So-has-anyone-pre-ordered-Dark-Souls-on-Steam#15376296
If you don't feel like it, it's with noting that this isn't a direct 1:1 port of the console game. They've made some modifications that have been obvious so far and I truly believe it is the definitive version of the game. Hell, until I have a child I probably won't love anything as much as I'm loving this game, and I'm on NG+3 on the PS3.
Really? Some people really think that this is some plot against PC gamers in order to make console gamers happy? Granted, From is a Japanese company and the Japanese have some odd morals, but this just seems idiotic. It probably has to do with the fact that From has never actually made any game for computers, meaning that they are unfamiliar with the standards of PC games as opposed to console games.