Dark Souls Port Brings Console Problems to PC

[ImperialSunlight]

I'm more pissed off that people who ALREADY BOUGHT THE GAME have to wait till October for the DLC, or buy the game again on PC. It's quite a greedy move by Namco and I'm worried that I might be obsessed enough with Dark Souls to fall for it...

 

[ResonanceSD]

Wow, After reading some of the comments here I am ashammed to call my self a PC gamer.

You are getting the same freaking game plus new added content for FREE. I can't count how many times I replayed Dark Souls on my PS3 and still enjoy the hell out of it despite some of it flaws. Like the framedrop rate in Blighttown, Fuck that place. So it won't run perfectly fine in 1900x1200 resolution or higher the 30 fps, So what? It is still a great game.

And here I thought the whole PC gamer elitist was a exaggeration or what the "extreme" ones where called. But apperently not.

Whilst I don't agree with most of the comments, those of us who have got machines capable of better performance than a PS3 would appreciate some acknowledgement of this from developers. It's not a dealbreaker (that's GFWL's job), but it sure as hell is annoying.

Please don't tell me that the majority of PC gamers are so obsessed with graphics that they won't buy an incredible game tailor-made for their hardcore mindset because it looks like a console game. That would be sad.

Not obsessing, but you can't be annoyed when I expect something released for this

to be slightly better than something released for this.

 

[hazabaza1]

Jesus, I await the multitude of threads that will kickstart yet another PC/console flamewar once the PC edition gets released.

Edit:

I'm hoping to do a Let's play

I know we've disagreed on some things before, and we might not share the same views quite often, but please, please take my advice and do not do this blind. Not just because of the fact that blind LPs of hard games are some of the worst things to ever appear, but also because it's such a better experience if you play the game just to soak up the atmosphere the first time around.

 

[chadachada123]

I'm more pissed off that people who ALREADY BOUGHT THE GAME have to wait till October for the DLC, or buy the game again on PC. It's quite a greedy move by Namco and I'm worried that I might be obsessed enough with Dark Souls to fall for it...

Honestly, from viewing this whole fiasco, I think it might not be because of Namco but because of FROM. It seems like FROM has little experience in dealing with DLC, considering they promised they wouldn't make DLC to begin with.

Still, I'll be buying both the PC version and the Xbox DLC, because I want to support FROM as much as possible.

 

[gnihton]

Please don't tell me that the majority of PC gamers are so obsessed with graphics that they won't buy an incredible game tailor-made for their hardcore mindset because it looks like a console game. That would be sad.

The average hardcore game is 5.625 times the picture quality of this (actually, pretty much every game is). The average really hardcore (professional) game is 11.25 times the picture quality, assuming 1080p.

Just pointing out that while the console crowd are fine considering this hardcore in comparison to what they have, pc gamers mostly will disagree due to the game limiting their reaction times, being a slideshow, and being completely blurry and undefined because the image is upscaled 2.8125 times to fit the average monitor.

I mean sure, it's a single player game, but there are significantly more challenging things that test your capability much more. You can hop on Quake Live or Promod and have to play against players that can react in 1/120th of a second and have no practical skill cap, as opposed to a single player game that's designed for you to be able to win, and limits you to reacting in 1/30th of a second (and possibly slower, depending on framerate drops).

Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by hardcore. And in all fairness, I don't really know much about the game, but it doesn't sound like it's particularly hardcore, you just have to learn attack patterns apparently. But if you consider learning attack patterns hardcore, then you're mistaken... unless it's a bullet hell. Or Tetris [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kqKOlcaZuI&feature=player_detailpage#t=309s].

 

[ReinWeisserRitter]

And not a fuck was given. If the game is decent, who cares if it gets some graphics snobs' undies in a twist.

 

[MPerce]

The average hardcore game is 5.675 times the picture quality of this (and ones that aren't hardcore, actually). The average really hardcore (professional) game is 11.25 times the picture quality, assuming 1080p.

Just pointing out that while the console crowd are fine considering this hardcore in comparison to what they have, pc gamers mostly will disagree due to the game limiting their reaction times, being a slideshow, and being completely blurry and undefined because the image is upscaled 2.8125 times to fit the average monitor.

I mean sure, it's a single player game, but there are significantly more challenging things that test your capability much more. You can hop on Quake Live or Promod and have to play against players that can react in 1/120th of a second and have no practical skill cap, as opposed to a single player game that's designed for you to be able to win, and limits you to reacting in 1/30th of a second (and possibly slower, depending on framerate drops).

Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by hardcore. And in all fairness, I don't really know much about the game, but it doesn't sound like it's particularly hardcore, you just have to learn attack patterns apparently. But if you consider learning attack patterns hardcore, then you're mistaken... unless it's a bullet hell. Or Tetris [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kqKOlcaZuI&feature=player_detailpage#t=309s].

Sweet Jesus, that video was ridiculous.

Apologies on not defining hardcore correctly. I mean that the game is pretty fucking hard, especially for a single player game. It's no bullet hell, but very few games are.

According to the article the game is still very playable despite the graphical shortcomings compared to other PC games. I just find it rather odd that this is such a big deal to so many people, especially since many people demonize developers for thinking that good graphics=good game. As long as the game is good and the graphics non-detrimental to the gameplay (which is apparently the case), why get in such a tizzy?

 

[gnihton]

Sweet Jesus, that video was ridiculous.

Apologies on not defining hardcore correctly. I mean that the game is pretty fucking hard, especially for a single player game. It's no bullet hell, but very few games are.

According to the article the game is still very playable despite the graphical shortcomings compared to other PC games. I just find it rather odd that this is such a big deal to so many people, especially since many people demonize developers for thinking that good graphics=good game. As long as the game is good and the graphics non-detrimental to the gameplay (which is apparently the case), why get in such a tizzy?

Resolution and framerate aren't reeeealllyy graphics, I mean they are, but it isn't about eyecandy. They define how pleasant something is to play, and 30fps is just not acceptable for most pc gamers, and even some console gamers (CoD runs at 60fps on consoles, it could be a reason why it's so popular on consoles).

It's not about graphics, it's about playability. I absolutely loved Amnesia: The Dark Descent (I can't wait for A Machine For Pigs), but if it were running at 30fps, I wouldn't fucking bother. Framerate is the deciding factor on whether something's playable or not. For many, many people, 30 fps isn't. As for resolution... higher resolution just looks nicer. It has nothing to do with the graphics of the game, You could run Metro 2033 maxed out at 300x300 resolution and it would still look like arse on account of the resolution, despite it being one of the nicest looking games out there.

Since you're probably going 'that's just complaining about the graphics!' resolution also defines the accuracy of the representation of the game world. Higher resolution = you see more. Although I really don't have to justify people liking higher resolution, it just looks nicer. I mean, why do you go to cinemas instead of watching a movie on tv? Is that being 'picky' or a 'graphics whore'? Or is it, as a lot of people say, "viewing it as it's supposed to be viewed"?

Hint: It's the latter.

 

[ThePuzzldPirate]

Well this sucks, I wasn't expecting redone textures or lighting but I was at least hoping I would be able to at least play it in 1080p at 60fps. Guess I will buy it when modders figure it out.

 

[RubyT]

It would be fun to cross-compare how many people moan about 30 FPS and low-fidelity here, but are touting "games don't need good graphics to be good" in those other topics.

 

[ResonanceSD]

It would be fun to cross-compare how many people moan about 30 FPS and low-fidelity here, but are touting "games don't need good graphics to be good" in those other topics.

There's a difference between stuttering and say, the graphics found in Bastion. Bastion isn't photorealistic, but the graphics are smooth. The problems with 30FPS is it's roughly half the FPS provided by a PC monitor. Try playing a console game with a strobelight on.

 

[ThePuzzldPirate]

It would be fun to cross-compare how many people moan about 30 FPS and low-fidelity here, but are touting "games don't need good graphics to be good" in those other topics.

I agree, it would be interesting though they are right about one thing. A bad port is a bad port, unlocking frames and resolution is pretty standard when it comes to PC games. I'm not upset at all cause I know someone on the internet will figure it out.

 

[MPerce]

It's not about graphics, it's about playability. I absolutely loved Amnesia: The Dark Descent (I can't wait for A Machine For Pigs), but if it were running at 30fps, I wouldn't fucking bother. Framerate is the deciding factor on whether something's playable or not. For many, many people, 30 fps isn't. As for resolution... higher resolution just looks nicer. It has nothing to do with the graphics of the game, You could run Metro 2033 maxed out at 300x300 resolution and it would still look like arse on account of the resolution, despite it being one of the nicest looking games out there.

Since you're probably going 'that's just complaining about the graphics!' resolution also defines the accuracy of the representation of the game world. Higher resolution = you see more. Although I really don't have to justify people liking higher resolution, it just looks nicer. I mean, why do you go to cinemas instead of watching a movie on tv? Is that being 'picky' or a 'graphics whore'? Or is it, as a lot of people say, "viewing it as it's supposed to be viewed"?

Hint: It's the latter.

Touche, good sir. Being a console gamer who's never owned a PC worth jack shit, I infrequently take such matters into consideration. I still feel like I'd need to actually see the game in motion on a PC to make a call as to its quality, but I now understand what people are pissed about.

Knowledge is awesome, being ignorant is not. Thank you very much!

 

[loa]

30 fps isn't bad at all if there's motion blur.
The 1024x768 limitation seems much worse since almost everyone has 16x9 screens nowadays.
THAT's what will look like crap.

The ability to change the resolution should be a given in any pc game and I have yet to see one that doesn't allow for it.

 

[Gennadios]

I'm really looking forward to it, I'll get a legendarily difficult game bundled in with a meta game where one has to wrestle with Games for Windows: Live and resolution incompatibilities.

I can already see this being game of the year.

Disclaimer:
That was not sarcasm.

 

[DonTsetsi]

Up-scaling 1024x720 to 1680x1050 would look really blurry (hell, if I had a 2048x1440 monitor I wouldn't complain at all)... And since I watch my monitor from half a meter that would be a problem. Also, sluggish control from the low refresh rate can be aggravating, but it will increase difficulty, which could be good, since k&m controls could make the game too easy on the PC.

 

[Joseph Alexander]

Wow, After reading some of the comments here I am ashammed to call my self a PC gamer.

You are getting the same freaking game plus new added content for FREE. I can't count how many times I replayed Dark Souls on my PS3 and still enjoy the hell out of it despite some of it flaws. Like the framedrop rate in Blighttown, Fuck that place. So it won't run perfectly fine in 1900x1200 resolution or higher the 30 fps, So what? It is still a great game.

And here I thought the whole PC gamer elitist was a exaggeration or what the "extreme" ones where called. But apperently not.

Whilst I don't agree with most of the comments, those of us who have got machines capable of better performance than a PS3 would appreciate some acknowledgement of this from developers. It's not a dealbreaker (that's GFWL's job), but it sure as hell is annoying.

Please don't tell me that the majority of PC gamers are so obsessed with graphics that they won't buy an incredible game tailor-made for their hardcore mindset because it looks like a console game. That would be sad.

Not obsessing, but you can't be annoyed when I expect something released for this

https://p.twimg.com/AzI2mEYCcAAK02l.jpg:large/img]

to be slightly better than something released for this.

[img]http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/three-sixty-1.jpg/img][/quote]
yes we can when its a post-release port being done cause fan petition.
were it being made with mind to port it to PC I'd be a bit more on your side(I frankly don't give two shits about graphics-whores like yourself) but considering the facts that this is being done as a favor to the petitioners, you acting like an entitled brat who is mad that the game he wanted isn't coming out on his console and thus blaming the developers is uncalled for.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I think I am one of the single PC gamers left that has a 19" monitor with a max resolution of 1200/1024 which I have been using for a couple of years now.

Guess the cropping from the lower resolution won't make the game blurry enough and it will be playable.