The Dark Souls PC version controversy.

[RhombusHatesYou]

I am just proposing the preference that ports should be the same game across the board.

Yeah, right... and what happens when the game is one of the now-rare PC to console ports?

 

[Stavros Dimou]

I am just proposing the preference that ports should be the same game across the board.

Yeah, right... and what happens when the game is one of the now-rare PC to console ports?

That happened with Duke Nukem Forever and console gamers where 10x times more harsh to that game than what PC gamers are to Dark Souls.

Btw,DNF had less problems than this.

 

[burningdragoon]

Who says anyone is judging it on graphics alone? Is it fair to take graphics into account at all? Or is the visual presentation of a game completely irrelevant?
Oh that's not what I meant (keyword, success is debatable) to say, but I'm mostly taking away from Draech that he's mostly talking about graphics with me.


For the record your "We didn't know what we were doing" discount would have been a good idea, though I think the bonus content does something (maybe not everything) to make up for that.

but hey
I also wouldn't want it because the Wii version looked shitty, but that's a different point

I dont want Dark Soul. Judging by PC standards. It looks shitty. Just like the standards you are now applying to the Wii > Xbox.

Except I didn't say the Wii version looked shitty by 360 standards, I said it looked shitty. If you'd like to know some Wii games that I wouldn't mind seeing ported to 360/PS3 even though they look shitty by PS3/360/PC standards, I can do that as well.

So you dont have any standards or you just have THE standards?

You didn't judge it by the standards of the 360, just universal standards of graphics? As defined by you? and your preference for Xbox360? I rest my case.

Or maybe I judge games on more than just graphics? If anything, I would judge a game based on it's original home. In Dark Souls' case, PS3. In Force Unleased's case, 360. Then I take those standards, and expect ports to lesser systems to be worse and ports to equal to or better systems to be at best equal (out of the box at least).

Oh you dont have graphical preference?

Just judge a game according to what plat form it is made for?

Well Dark Souls Pc is made for PC. And I'll judge it by that standard.

So you missed / purposely ignored / disagree with but couldn't just say outright and had to continue being aggressive for some reason the word "original" in my post. The PC version of Dark Souls was made for PC... from the 360 version, which was made from the PS3 version. So I wouldn't expect the PC version to be any better than PS3 version simply because it's on the PC (other than keyboard+mouse support, which they dropped the ball on). And I say "expect" not demand or anything. Expect equal as in "pleasantly surprised if better and not throw a fit if not".

And please, let me know about a console-to-PC port that was significantly better than the original other than input preference and openness of platform and I will hold that high as a standard of what ports should strive to be even though it's (probably) the exception and not the rule.

 

[Ildanach]

I am just proposing the preference that ports should be the same game across the board.

Yeah, right... and what happens when the game is one of the now-rare PC to console ports?

As long as it plays well then it should be fine.
I am not against them fiddling with the options to make it playable.
I am against this notion that the game has to be different because we are special and our platform is special. I am saying that they don't have to do more than make the same game playable on a different platform but if they want to do more it is welcome.
In terms of From Software and Dark Souls however. If the PC version is superior to the Ps3/X360 version then that is a decision by the developers not anyone else. The developers are the ones who make the game if they don't want to make money off the west then thats your/their problem and
I believe they don't care Nihon (Japan) is a big enough market for the company. The west is just extra money, a side dish.
The same attitude that PC gamers show to devs gets shown back to the gamers.
Because they don't need you at all.

 

[Stavros Dimou]

Who says anyone is judging it on graphics alone? Is it fair to take graphics into account at all? Or is the visual presentation of a game completely irrelevant?
Oh that's not what I meant (keyword, success is debatable) to say, but I'm mostly taking away from Draech that he's mostly talking about graphics with me.


For the record your "We didn't know what we were doing" discount would have been a good idea, though I think the bonus content does something (maybe not everything) to make up for that.

but hey
I also wouldn't want it because the Wii version looked shitty, but that's a different point

I dont want Dark Soul. Judging by PC standards. It looks shitty. Just like the standards you are now applying to the Wii > Xbox.

Except I didn't say the Wii version looked shitty by 360 standards, I said it looked shitty. If you'd like to know some Wii games that I wouldn't mind seeing ported to 360/PS3 even though they look shitty by PS3/360/PC standards, I can do that as well.

So you dont have any standards or you just have THE standards?

You didn't judge it by the standards of the 360, just universal standards of graphics? As defined by you? and your preference for Xbox360? I rest my case.

Or maybe I judge games on more than just graphics? If anything, I would judge a game based on it's original home. In Dark Souls' case, PS3. In Force Unleased's case, 360. Then I take those standards, and expect ports to lesser systems to be worse and ports to equal to or better systems to be at best equal (out of the box at least).

Oh you dont have graphical preference?

Just judge a game according to what plat form it is made for?

Well Dark Souls Pc is made for PC. And I'll judge it by that standard.

So you missed / purposely ignored / disagree with but couldn't just say outright and had to continue being aggressive for some reason the word "original" in my post. The PC version of Dark Souls was made for PC... from the 360 version, which was made from the PS3 version. So I wouldn't expect the PC version to be any better than PS3 version simply because it's on the PC (other than keyboard+mouse support, which they dropped the ball on). And I say "expect" not demand or anything. Expect equal as in "pleasantly surprised if better and not throw a fit if not".

And please, let me know about a console-to-PC port that was significantly better than the original other than input preference and openness of platform and I will hold that high as a standard of what ports should strive to be even though it's (probably) the exception and not the rule.

Well Skyrim was made for Xbox360 and was then ported to PC.
Yup,the GUI of the game was bad as it wasn't ideal for PC input devices,so the controls felt bad if you played it with keyboard and mouse.
But aside these,Bethesda released the very same tool they used to build the game to the players,so they can build anything they want,even a completely new game from scratch using the creation engine,and they also released high res texture pack,even if their official texture pack was still poorer than the texture packs of modders.

And most importantly: Bethesda released patches that fixed the game's problems.
Last game From released on PC (Ninja Blade) never got a single patch and its bugs and glitches were never fixed.

 

[Ildanach]

The amateur isn't paid by me. They are. If a guy who isn't even paid can do a better job than them in 23 min. They didn't do a good enough job.

Fair enough and I concede that this is most likely true.
But I still think that as long as the game is playable and has a way to be played and enjoyed it is a good port by my standards.
I appreciate that you have a different idea on what you want.
But I really do believe that changing the game significantly is not needed because if you wanted to play the same game you would buy this game.
But you might want the super deluxe edition for PC just cause its PC and I don't agree with that.
Question would you buy this on Console? Since its obviously better there.
Or do you own it already?
Just curious is all.

I dont want the super Delux PC Edition. I want the PC Edition.

The one that is judge by the standards of other games on my system. And it fails it. It doesn't matter that it was originally for an xbox/Ps3. I am not buying it for an Xbox. I am buying it for a PC. And they will have to compete on that lvl.

The thing is I asked would you buy it for console if you didn't like the game in the first place why buy the port or is it a case of I only play on PC?
I am just confused as to why people might consider buying the game on PC just because its on PC.
I migrate to whatever platform is needed if I like the game enough.
And I take the game for the games merits not the platforms merits.
I understand that other people are different, and this is all preferenced based.
I am just proposing the preference that ports should be the same game across the board. Exclusives are exclusives because they make the system work for its owner and should be treated as such.

Well I think you make a mistake in assuming the game and the platform are separate things. I would buy angry birds for my phone, but not for my PC.
PC gaming isn't the same as console gaming.

So when I want Dark Souls for PC, then I want Dark Souls for PC. It is the same game, but not the same experience.

I am very interested in Dark Souls and I would like to play it on my PC. But like everything else negative factors will drag the experience with it. If you are going to put it on PC you better work with your plat form and compete on its lvl.

There is a certain truth to the example angry birds but certain game types work well on almost all platforms, especially when PC has access to controllers.
Driving games, Fighting games, platformers tend to be highly playable etc etc.
Or are we talking about graphical fidelity? Some lip service menu options and maybe an actual new texture pack?
I think GFWL and keyboard and mouse being borked is the worst part.
But apart from that I haven't got much in the way of understanding what you mean by "competeing on PC's level"
Sorry I am dense sometimes.

EDIT: Just saw your recent post to burningdragoon and yes that is reasonable and I tend to agree its just that I have a different set of standards that are lower than this due to my perspective. Its my opinion those options are nice but not necessary others think they are essential and this is fine by me.

 

[Comic Sans]

If they didn't want to make console players jealous, why did they give PC gamers extra content before it was released as DLC for console versions, hmm?

Witty Name Here makes a good point. I didn't see a single complaint about Minecraft being less good on the 360 than the PC version. However, typical entitled PC elitists seem to think that, because the spent more money on their rig, they deserve to have developers spend more money and time on their version of the game. (This doesn't mean that they should have to pay more for the game than those stinking console peasants, of course!)

They didn't GIVE us anything. They are charging us for it. We pay $40 for the game, a new copy in store is $30. Console players have the DLC optional and don't have to pay for it if they don't want it, we have no choice. And again, it's not elitist to expect that the basic PC features that have been standard for the last decade be included. It's not "extra work", it's standard work. If a motorcycle company decides to make a car, if the car doesn't have windows that roll down or a trunk, I don't excuse it because they are a motorcycle company and not used to making cars. I don't buy it. If a company wants my money, they need to make me feel they deserve it. Making the worst port I have ever seen, with less PC options than the original Quake, does not get me to spend top dollar. It makes me wait for a sale, where I feel I am paying what it is worth. That's capitalism.

 

[Stavros Dimou]

If they didn't want to make console players jealous, why did they give PC gamers extra content before it was released as DLC for console versions, hmm?

Witty Name Here makes a good point. I didn't see a single complaint about Minecraft being less good on the 360 than the PC version. However, typical entitled PC elitists seem to think that, because the spent more money on their rig, they deserve to have developers spend more money and time on their version of the game. (This doesn't mean that they should have to pay more for the game than those stinking console peasants, of course!)

You seem to not realise that pc players doesn't want their version of the game to be better than the console version,but what they actually asking is to comfort to the standards the industry has adopted. The ability for a computer application to be able to render 1 pixel for every 1 pixel of the screen ,is necessary and standard as the ability of mobile phones to send SMS text messages.
Since mobile phones came out decades ago,they had this feature,and they still have,and it would be crazy for a new mobile phone to not feature SMS messages.
Would you call someone who would expect from their moblie phone to be able to send messages,a "mobile phone elitist" ?
Well the same goes for the ability to display on various resolutions for all kind of PC software,not only games.

And I can't see any logic in the thinking that somebody who wants to make money shouldn't work at all but people should pay him anyway because "he is a good person".
If you want money you have to work for it.
Gamers doesn't have to be charity helpers,they could also be active thinking consumers.

 

[burningdragoon]

*Snip Souls*

And please, let me know about a console-to-PC port that was significantly better than the original other than input preference and openness of platform and I will hold that high as a standard of what ports should strive to be even though it's (probably) the exception and not the rule.

Well Skyrim was made for Xbox360 and was then ported to PC.
Yup,the GUI of the game was bad as it wasn't ideal for PC input devices,so the controls felt if you played it with keyboard and mouse.
But aside these,Bethesda released the very same tool they used to build the game to the players,so they can build anything they want,even a completely new game from scratch using the creation engine,and they also released high res texture pack,even if their official texture pack was still poorer than the texture packs of modders.

And most importantly: Bethesda released patches that fixed the game's problems.
Last game From released on PC (Ninja Blade) never got a single patch and its bugs and glitches were never fixed.

Second point first: And From has patched Dark Souls on consoles at least once already, so that's... um.. something. Anyway...

I would consider complaining about the UI for Skyrim on PC was totally justified, since they really should have known better and probably could afford the dev work/time required to have two separate interfaces. I'd also say it's almost cheating to use them as a good example of console->PC porting.

 

[GAunderrated]

So you missed / purposely ignored / disagree with but couldn't just say outright and had to continue being aggressive for some reason the word "original" in my post. The PC version of Dark Souls was made for PC... from the 360 version, which was made from the PS3 version. So I wouldn't expect the PC version to be any better than PS3 version simply because it's on the PC (other than keyboard+mouse support, which they dropped the ball on). And I say "expect" not demand or anything. Expect equal as in "pleasantly surprised if better and not throw a fit if not".

And please, let me know about a console-to-PC port that was significantly better than the original other than input preference and openness of platform and I will hold that high as a standard of what ports should strive to be even though it's (probably) the exception and not the rule.

Where it was made for first is a red herring. It doesn't matter. It isn't on the Xbox. It is on the PC.

I am paying for a PC game.

Now the PC has simple standards that the console doesn't have to deal with. But guess what. Just because you came from the console doesn't mean you can skip over this.

You are applying console standards on what is a PC game. Not going to fly. If I can only play it with a controller, then not a good port. It may work like on the console, but controllers arn't the standard .

Console to PC ports dont have to be better. Just up to standard.

I am paying for a PC game. I want a PC game.

That means i can play it with Keyboard and mouse.
Rebind my keys.
Change my resolution.
See the game in more than 30 fps.
Have an FoV that doesn't give me a headache (or give me a slider)
Remove xbox controller related instructions (Press Start to begin)

This is not a better version. This is a PC version.

Very good post, saves me time trying to explain this to the anti-QQ brigade

 

[piinyouri]

I'm a console(and PC) player and I wouldn't have felt jealous in the least bit.
Sorry.

On the other hand, this controversy should be fun to watch.

 

[Stavros Dimou]

*Snip Souls*

And please, let me know about a console-to-PC port that was significantly better than the original other than input preference and openness of platform and I will hold that high as a standard of what ports should strive to be even though it's (probably) the exception and not the rule.

Well Skyrim was made for Xbox360 and was then ported to PC.
Yup,the GUI of the game was bad as it wasn't ideal for PC input devices,so the controls felt if you played it with keyboard and mouse.
But aside these,Bethesda released the very same tool they used to build the game to the players,so they can build anything they want,even a completely new game from scratch using the creation engine,and they also released high res texture pack,even if their official texture pack was still poorer than the texture packs of modders.

And most importantly: Bethesda released patches that fixed the game's problems.
Last game From released on PC (Ninja Blade) never got a single patch and its bugs and glitches were never fixed.

Second point first: And From has patched Dark Souls on consoles at least once already, so that's... um.. something. Anyway...

I would consider complaining about the UI for Skyrim on PC was totally justified, since they really should have known better and probably could afford the dev work/time required to have two separate interfaces. I'd also say it's almost cheating to use them as a good example of console->PC porting.

I hope they will patch the pc version of the game too,because I'd like it to play it if it was fixed. I just have the fear that the issues are not accidents but choices. Even if you might have thought the opposite,I don't hate Dark Souls.
I have nothing with its gameplay,atmosphere,music,style,art design,or story. I'm actually investing so much time replying in this thread because I was interested in buying the game and I came up with discovering some inexcusable for the age and time we are living in issues with its pc version. It's not like "Hey I want the version of the game that I'll buy will be superior so I can boast about it" but rather more like "Damn,it looked such a good game,I heard that it was so fun,why did it had to have so many problems on the platform I was going to play at?". I don't know if Namco could afford the money to invest more work on it and make a decent port,but I think they should.


P.S. pc games aren't the only ports that get screwed.There where also many ps3 games that where bad ports. PS3 gamers very often have to deal with games that doesn't work good on their platform too. Look at the frame rate issues Skyrim and Rage had on PS3. Didn't the PS3 gamers deserved better than this too ? I'm not a "pc elitist",but instead I just think that developers,ANY developers not only From Software,should always release games that are up to the platform's standards,and provide a decent experience. The individual platform doesn't matter. I would defend PS3 gamers for getting shitty ports,the same way I defend PC gamers for getting shitty ports. It's not a matter of which platform is better,it's that developers should be working good enough to provide for each platform the best possible experience that each platform can give.

 

[Ildanach]

The amateur isn't paid by me. They are. If a guy who isn't even paid can do a better job than them in 23 min. They didn't do a good enough job.

Fair enough and I concede that this is most likely true.
But I still think that as long as the game is playable and has a way to be played and enjoyed it is a good port by my standards.
I appreciate that you have a different idea on what you want.
But I really do believe that changing the game significantly is not needed because if you wanted to play the same game you would buy this game.
But you might want the super deluxe edition for PC just cause its PC and I don't agree with that.
Question would you buy this on Console? Since its obviously better there.
Or do you own it already?
Just curious is all.

This is very much my view. I used to game on pc, and was more focused on just having games run and be playable than wanting the graphics to THA BEST EVAR!!!!! (this led to my other thread being confused about the whole 60fps thing).

the fact that (a) this became more work than its worth (gave in and bought a few games on steam in a sale, and I can't play one of them online because my modem doesn't auto connect - seriously, the only reason the game will not let me online is because my modem has to manually connect each time I start up) and (b) I saw more games I wanted top play on console than on pc is what prompted my switch.

Besides, I'm more likely to gush about how Beyond Good and Evil, Limbo or Blazblue looks than Many big name titles.

With titles like Catherine and Dark Souls/ Dragons Dogma coming out its a good time to be importing hard fun good gameplay games. Hooray for no region locking games on Ps3 unlike PC over there.... (I love PC for GoG and old RTS/some new RPG's)

 

[godofslack]

I'm okay with a game not having keyboard controls, as long as they state that it's required. Super Meatboy for example was unplayable on a keyboard.

That being said the resolution and frame problems are unacceptable, and need to be resolved in a patch, if they want people to purchase at 40 bucks. If there are field of view problems they too need to be resolved.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I think all PC gamers should buy this game. Show your support. It is their first PC title. If you show them that PC is a viable platform, they'll do a better job next time, because now they have experience.