Prez wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 20:43:

The fact that DSFix was released so abruptly after Dark Souls debuted on PC smacks of either complete ineptitude or complete indifference on the part of the game's developer.

Yeah, that has a whole lot to do with how poorly the port was received I think. It's hard to dispute the logic really - If a modder with no connection to the developer can write a quick hack to fix the resolution in about a day after release, how hard of a tweak would it have been for the developer to make in the first place if they cared at all? I am perfectly able to make those tweaks on my own, so it's no big deal for me, but that is a fair point regardless.

Patching the game would have required a very expensive title update with Microsoft due to GFWL. I'm not defending their choice not to do this, just offering context. It's probably not that they didn't realize "oh hey we should patch this because its easily fixed" but couldn't get their publisher to give them the money to actually do it.

As for why they didn't do it in the first place the Japanese PC gaming market is essentially non-existent, they probably genuinely didn't understand the sorts of requirements PC consumers usually have.

Dark Souls PC isn't the worst port ever. That title probably goes to RE4 PC, which originally shipped without any lighting effects. I kid you not, they either forgot to bake the lighting into the levels or they were using the wrong shader for the materials. Either way, it was an atrocious issue that somehow made it into the shipped game. Also, there was no mouse support at all, even though the game was basically a shooter.

saluk wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 15:09:
PC gamers complain when companies don't port. PC gamers complain when companies do port (even if lacking the resources to do an excellent job). What're you gonna do.

Lacking resources? Lacking care maybe, lacking enough common sense to realise that people on PC like to be play in their native monitor res.....
Edit. You don't need to do an "excellent job", you need to do the bare minimum.

It took 1 guy to fix the resolution and unlock the FPS less than 24hrs. I donated him my money and bought the game off the cheapest website I could find.

The people that ported this thing over are complete morons. This is quite possibly the worst port ever.

The fact that DSFix was released so abruptly after Dark Souls debuted on PC smacks of either complete ineptitude or complete indifference on the part of the game's developer.

Yeah, that has a whole lot to do with how poorly the port was received I think. It's hard to dispute the logic really - If a modder with no connection to the developer can write a quick hack to fix the resolution in about a day after release, how hard of a tweak would it have been for the developer to make in the first place if they cared at all? I am perfectly able to make those tweaks on my own, so it's no big deal for me, but that is a fair point regardless.

It isn't my job as a customer to make games functional. The fact that DSFix was released so abruptly after Dark Souls debuted on PC smacks of either complete ineptitude or complete indifference on the part of the game's developer.

There are three big problems with the PC port for Dark Souls 1.

There are three mods which resolve or are workarounds for these three big problems.

1) Resolution/rendering = DSFix: http://darksouls.nexusmods.com/mods/19

2) Keyboard and Mouse controls = DSMFix: http://darksouls.nexusmods.com/mods/28

3) GfWL issues = DSCFix: http://darksouls.nexusmods.com/mods/334

Yeah it sucks that the game needed the mods, but the port is hardly unplayable for anyone with a little bit of tech-savy.

ItBurn wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 11:30:

ochentay4 wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 11:25:
Generally Im really vocal about bad ports, but Dark Souls is not a terrible port, it only has 3 faults:

1. Graphics, easily fixed using DSfix (it also provides more usefull features, best mod ever really).
2. Controls, K+M is terrible, but using a 360 gamepad (which the game was designed for) is great, no complains.
3. G4WL, its crap, it worked for me when I wanted to play, but never cared too much for online play so, offline profile and good to go.

So please people stop complaining about Dark Souls port (which all complains are easily fixable) and go play it, as its one of the best games I have played ever, and Ive played too many games already

Tell this to the guy who doesn't read gaming forums all day and who isn't technical. He's going to be pretty happy about his purchase of this unplayable game! Also, I don't know about you, but my backlog of great games is so massive that I probably have two lifetimes worth. Why would I pick a bad port instead of a great one?

Well, many people dont care that much of graphics (its not horrendous, its just 720p upscaled to whatever resolution you have, just like the 360), about controls, well, this is a game that you can manage to play with a K+M but this game is ideal for gamepads and ALL gamers should have a 360 gamepad anyway, and regarding G4WL, well, I give you that it sucks. All in all the game is 100% playable out of the box.

And regarding backlog, well take a look at my profile... http://steamcommunity.com/id/matcarfer

Verno wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 09:16:
I'm totally ok with that as long as the PC version is better this time around.

here's hoping we don't need 3 or 4 mods just to get to a playable state

i'm pretty sure From Software actually warned the PC gaming community that the port would not be anything amazing, and that it would pretty much be a straight port. I understood this while making my purchase of the game on Steam. It is an amazing game, played through at the default 720p first time. When DSfix was released along with the option to run at 60fps - Wow, fixated!

I was of two minds on the original. Of course shoddy ports suck but to not buy it doesn't necessarily send the correct message to developers. They probably can't discern whether low sales of a console port are due to general apathy or anger on the part of the PC community, so I went ahead and bought it. I greatly prefer playing all of my games except driving ones with a mouse and keyboard, so I am not thrilled about the broken controls, but I have a controller so I guess no biggie.

I don't mind the delay for the sequel on PC, since it is apparently going to be a short one. Publishers have their reasons for not wanting to do simultaneous releases; I just hope that when the game does arrive on PC it is a far sight better of a port job than the original was.

PC gamers complain when companies don't port. PC gamers complain when companies do port (even if lacking the resources to do an excellent job). What're you gonna do.

I've been playing DS1 after hearing a lot of good things about it. Amazing game. Worth the little bit of extra effort. Far from unplayable - the gameplay itself is what's unplayable, because it's so dang hard and unforgiving! But that's what's fun about it.

In this day and age when so many games like to hold your hand, it's refreshing to have a game push back and ask a bit more of you without feeling unfair.

ItBurn wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 12:28:

Redmask wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 12:24:

ItBurn wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 12:11:
I'm not personally upset, but I still have an opinion on the matter. I've read a lot about the game even though I don't own it; unplayable has been thrown around a lot and I actually feel like you guys are downplaying it. But yeah, I haven't played it. I've been burned before by bad ports.

Why would anyone downplay it? We don't own stock in the company and have no motivation to do so. You have never even played it and you're saying people who have played it don't know what they're talking about, that's not rational.

It is a playable but lazy port. I doubt they did this on purpose but it's impossible to know either way. It's biggest sin is the forced resolution output but this is fixed by clicking and dragging a file from one directory to another, something even the most ignorant steam users manage to do with the instructions on the stickied community page. I don't think you will find a single person who will claim it's a good port but it is certainly playable, I played from start to finish before the resolution even existed.

Buy the next one, don't buy the next one, whatever. It's really not that big of a deal.

My opinion isn't based on sugar plums and fairies... I'm done trying to explain myself.

No, but it's not based on fact either. The PC port works perfectly fine out of the box. You can install one, ONE, mod which allows you to turn up the resolution and adjust some other graphical things. But you don't have to.

Yes, it is designed for a controller. Yes, it's your own fault if you insist on using kb+m and then complain that it's "unplayable."

So, really, you're whining about stuff that isn't true in a game you've never personally tried. Why bother even participating in this discussion? So you can complain about Dark Souls II when Dark Souls III is announced despite, once again, never trying it?

Cutter wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 11:35:
Why the fudge wouldn't they have developed this for the new consoles?

They probably didn't get devkits early enough, it's been in production for awhile. We might see a port later on based on the PC port ironically

Redmask wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 12:24:

ItBurn wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 12:11:
I'm not personally upset, but I still have an opinion on the matter. I've read a lot about the game even though I don't own it; unplayable has been thrown around a lot and I actually feel like you guys are downplaying it. But yeah, I haven't played it. I've been burned before by bad ports.

Why would anyone downplay it? We don't own stock in the company and have no motivation to do so. You have never even played it and you're saying people who have played it don't know what they're talking about, that's not rational.

It is a playable but lazy port. I doubt they did this on purpose but it's impossible to know either way. It's biggest sin is the forced resolution output but this is fixed by clicking and dragging a file from one directory to another, something even the most ignorant steam users manage to do with the instructions on the stickied community page. I don't think you will find a single person who will claim it's a good port but it is certainly playable, I played from start to finish before the resolution even existed.

Buy the next one, don't buy the next one, whatever. It's really not that big of a deal.

My opinion isn't based on sugar plums and fairies... I'm done trying to explain myself.

ItBurn wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 12:11:
I'm not personally upset, but I still have an opinion on the matter. I've read a lot about the game even though I don't own it; unplayable has been thrown around a lot and I actually feel like you guys are downplaying it. But yeah, I haven't played it. I've been burned before by bad ports.

Why would anyone downplay it? We don't own stock in the company and have no motivation to do so. You have never even played it and you're saying people who have played it don't know what they're talking about, that's not rational.

It is a playable but lazy port. I doubt they did this on purpose but it's impossible to know either way. It's biggest sin is the forced resolution output but this is fixed by clicking and dragging a file from one directory to another, something even the most ignorant steam users manage to do with the instructions on the stickied community page. I don't think you will find a single person who will claim it's a good port but it is certainly playable, I played from start to finish before the resolution even existed.

Buy the next one, don't buy the next one, whatever. It's really not that big of a deal.

Redmask wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 11:58:

ItBurn wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 11:30:
Tell this to the guy who doesn't read gaming forums all day and who isn't technical. He's going to be pretty happy about his purchase of this unplayable game! Also, I don't know about you, but my backlog of great games is so massive that I probably have two lifetimes worth. Why would I pick a bad port instead of a great one?

The game is perfectly playable out of the box, what it lacks is polish and PC specific UI touches. I'm not sure why you're so upset when you admit you don't even own it in the first place and don't speak from experience about its deficiencies or lack thereof.

It is not the best PC port I've played but it's far from what you make it out to be. The console versions had their share of bugs and problems too.

I'm not personally upset, but I still have an opinion on the matter. I've read a lot about the game even though I don't own it; unplayable has been thrown around a lot and I actually feel like you guys are downplaying it. But yeah, I haven't played it. I've been burned before by bad ports.

Seriously cannot wait for this game, my most anticipated game of 2014! The first one was great, and yes it was awesome on PC.

ItBurn wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 11:30:
Tell this to the guy who doesn't read gaming forums all day and who isn't technical. He's going to be pretty happy about his purchase of this unplayable game! Also, I don't know about you, but my backlog of great games is so massive that I probably have two lifetimes worth. Why would I pick a bad port instead of a great one?

The game is perfectly playable out of the box, what it lacks is polish and PC specific UI touches. I'm not sure why you're so upset when you admit you don't even own it in the first place and don't speak from experience about its deficiencies or lack thereof.

It is not the best PC port I've played but it's far from what you make it out to be. The console versions had their share of bugs and problems too.

Why the fudge wouldn't they have developed this for the new consoles?

ochentay4 wrote on Sep 19, 2013, 11:25:
Generally Im really vocal about bad ports, but Dark Souls is not a terrible port, it only has 3 faults:

1. Graphics, easily fixed using DSfix (it also provides more usefull features, best mod ever really).
2. Controls, K+M is terrible, but using a 360 gamepad (which the game was designed for) is great, no complains.
3. G4WL, its crap, it worked for me when I wanted to play, but never cared too much for online play so, offline profile and good to go.

So please people stop complaining about Dark Souls port (which all complains are easily fixable) and go play it, as its one of the best games I have played ever, and Ive played too many games already

Tell this to the guy who doesn't read gaming forums all day and who isn't technical. He's going to be pretty happy about his purchase of this unplayable game! Also, I don't know about you, but my backlog of great games is so massive that I probably have two lifetimes worth. Why would I pick a bad port instead of a great one?