Dark Souls port specs disappoint PC fans
Dark Souls will be a "faithful port" on PC, which means no higher resolution textures or increased frames-per-second.
From Software and Namco Bandai are finally bringing their special brand of brutality to PC with Dark Souls: Prepare to Die. The PC port is fulfilling a long-time request of PC fans, but more and more it seems like a very direct port -- and that's upsetting fans who see more potential in the game.
In an interview in Famitsu (via DSO Gaming), director Hidetaka Miyazaki stated outright that the game wouldn't be seeing upgrades to its resolution or FPS. "Yes, It's basically a faithful port," he said. "There's no change to the resolution. The frame rate won't be 60 FPS." To be clear, the resolution bit refers to upscaled assets, not monitor resolution sizes.
Obviously, the PC version would be capable of much more, but From Software doesn't seem keen on taking full advantage of the hardware. PC fans have been registering their displeasure at the news, but this may be difficult to change. While the developer recently indicated it was receptive to changing from GFW Live after PC fans complained, higher resolution textures and FPS is a larger time and money investment. Unless From expects hefty sales from the PC port, it might not be worth their while.
-
Steve Watts posted a new article, Dark Souls port specs disappoint PC fans.
Dark Souls will be a "faithful port" on PC, which means no higher resolution textures or increased frames-per-second.-
-
Er... you are confused. The developer was saying that they would not be creating a new higher resolution set of textures for the game... and that makes sense it would be a HUGE amount of effort to do unless they had already created the textures at a higher resolution and then down scaled them for the PS3 release... but why would they have done that?!? You will be able to play at a higher monitor resolution, but the textures will be the same as on the PS3... and they will look FINE!
The game looks great, it plays great... stop bitching you stupid internet!
They are giving us real PvP/multiplayer which is sooo much more important that having higher texture resolution... -
-
-
-
-
It's a disconnect between ego and reality.
From a business point of view the PC is the smallest, least important, most pirated platform. So it often gets treated as you would expect.
But PC gamers have in their heads this Glorious PC Master Race concept that they are by far the most important gaming platform, and expect to be treated like royalty.
This is why you have the rants and petitions.-
-
-
I think it is pretty well-accepted that the piracy rate is considerably higher on the PC than on consoles, regardless of what is "available" on torrents.
Modchips, soldering, risking permanent bans from Xbox Live or PSN. None of this is necessary to pirate PC games.
What percentage of console gamers do you think have a hacked/modded console, compared to the numbers of people who have illegally downloaded a PC game? The evidence suggests it's not even close.-
Don't get me wrong, I love PC gaming. That's why I'm so critical of those who do everything in their power to send the message to publishers that the PC isn't worth the trouble.
From a realistic perspective PC gamers should be the ones wooing the game makers, not the other way around. But again, there is this disconnect.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
THIS seems like a sane response...the level of butthurt and rage over this just confounds me.
If its really that bad people can just NOT BUY IT. This is the sort of game that generally isn't brought out on the PC to begin with. Its fine to point out its issues...but people on the internet have to be all gross about it and go fucking nuts like its Hitler to the power of Stalin times over 5000.
-
-
-
They didn't port RE4 or DMC3 because they weren't natively made on PC and they didn't want to expend their own resources to port it. DMC4, RE5 and all other modern Capcom games are made on the MT Framework which is a natively PC engine. They now make all their games for PC first and then port to console, which is why all their games starting in 2007 have been released on PC, by them.
-
-
-
-
-
Variable frame rate engines are more difficult to write than fixed-step engines. Physics and animation blending in particular can have unexpected results at different frame rates. It could be that their code was written to assume a 66.6ms timestep between frames, and they did not bother to fully decouple rendering from input processing and world step. That would be perfectly normal when developing a console-only title.
-
-
-
is this the lightning rod project that PC gamers will tee off with? are people applying the same sperglord rage to other PC ports?
it's kinda funny that multiplatform titles often get a pass, like BLOPS, which was an awful port. or perhaps Borderlands, which had a lot of shortcomings on PC.
then there's a title that didn't even exist on PCs at all, and people have a fucking demand list.-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Something was busted in there. It ran a lot worse than both CoD4 & MW2 for me and wasn't graphically superior in any way. Worse than any other PC game I had, many which should have been a lot more demanding.
Yet I'd gain 20-50 FPS in XP compared to Windows 7. I tried tweaking everything for that game and booting up my old OS was a last ditch effort to see if it was playable. Oddly enough I had the same problem with World at War so the only conclusion I could reach was that it was something Treyarch did to the engine, and probably not on purpose.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
GFWL is my only problem. Reusing low res console textures is fine because they're just trying to save on costs. There are technical reasons for locking a game at 30 fps (good examples are LA Noire's facial capture tech or physics bugs that can appear at high frame rates) so that's fine too. I thought I heard the game was going to be locked at 720p resolution and that's bad and it didn't make sense to me but that appears to be a misquote or mistranslation. I'll still buy it even if it has GFWL but I'll do so grudgingly and on sale. They really should replace GFWL with Steamworks. I think it will be better for the game's reception, reputation, and sales in the long run.
-
hmmm this troubles me. the only 2 things I really wanted were higher frame rates and higher resolution.
I think I will still buy this, unless there are some ungodly technical issues, and assuming it is priced appropriately. If its higher than 39.99 I wont bite until a steam sale. i think 29.99 would be more fair though.
i want the next D Souls to come out properly on PC, and that wont happen if this sales badly.
I love these games and want to support them (and a proper PC version for future installments) so much I will accept a degree of bullshit for this port. but I have my limits. -
-
In 12 months Hidetaka Miyazaki will join the long list of people in the business blaming piracy for PC sales of their game. Sure piracy is a problem but there are many people who do not pirate but at the same time they will not purchase a poor port. Make a freaking decent port that supports BASIC PC capabilities (keyboard mapping, mouse sensitivity, ect) It will increase sales. This should be Business 101 for these people.
-
Anyone complaining should just be quiet. Once upon a time the PC wasn't even going to get Dark Souls. just be happy we're finally going to be able to play it. This is one port I really don't care about getting all the PC bells and whistles. Don't listen to the PC elitist idiots, Namco. Thanks for taking the time to port it.
-
-
-