#DarkSoulsDowngrade and #YOULIED \\ a.k.a You got some splainin' to do, Namco

For the defenders who keep coming back saying "it's not a big deal, the game is still fun, It's not like From are known for graphics, etc." watch this video:

Watch_Dogs: A Vertical Slice Of Steaming Bullshots


SMLkP2p.png


Replace Watch_Dogs and Ubisoft with Dark Souls II and From Software/Namco Bandai. Same deal.

This is why people in this thread are frustrated and angry. Deception that carries all the way to a game's launch and beyond sucks, especially when it costs $60 .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_00sq7KCkno&list=UU7UdKZ9ujF1sFlP93dfjMgA&t=4m25s

He talks directly about it here.
 

Was that really running on PS3?

If so, my guess is that some parts of the game were running like dogshit and time was running out, so From decided to downgrade the graphics in an attempt to have the game running at 30 FPS all the time... (which apparently still doesn't happen)...

Definitely won't be picking this up until it's in the bargain bin
 
Was that really running on PS3?

If so, my guess is that some parts of the game were running like dogshit and time was running out, so From decided to downgrade the graphics in an attempt to have the game running at 30 FPS all the time... (which apparently still doesn't happen)...

Definitely won't be picking this up until it's in the bargain bin

performance wise i don't see a huge difference between this and my PS3 copy.
 
(One of the biggest problems for those of us playing the PS3 disc version are the excruciatingly long loading times.)
  • Objects and enemies materializing out of thin air.
  • Flickering shadows and light sources.
  • Out of sync sound effects.
  • Mob animations either freezing entirely or moving at lower FPS (like 5 FPS low).
  • Input lag both in the menus' and HUD screens.
  • Input lag during gameplay (character not reacting at all).
  • Player being "smelted into the wall" during a Boss fight.
  • Painful loading times (18 seconds on average for me: quickest was 14s. longest took 42s.)
  • Very inconsistent framerate (going from the higher 10s up to 60fps when nothing is happening on screen)

My experience throughout my 15 hr play through last Tuesday & Wednesday. PS3.

Also, did not need a torch at all in this area. Was actually slightly brighter than this.


Which by the way, is THIS AREA from the original demo
 
I tested the color-range theory. You do not need to adjust the range of your TV, as it is working as intended.

I have full range on on my TV and PS3. If there was a glitch here, when switching, the Dark Souls logo screen should've become blacker, as the lowest a "limited range" can get is 15. But it was 0, since it was equally black. Perhaps some people here are running dynamic contrast or auto black levels or something that's messing things up.

There is no glitch with Full Range RGB. You may still choose to crush the blacks and white, but I'd recommend playing with contrast and brightness settings to accommodate for the same effect you wish to attain, as it will not crush blacks and whites, but you'll lose some detail. Changing these settings is not a fix, but you can of course choose to do it to have the game appear more like you wish it had.
 
My experience throughout my 15 hr play through last Tuesday & Wednesday. PS3.

Also, did not need a torch at all in this area. Was actually slightly brighter than this.



Which by the way, is THIS AREA from the original demo

This change was pretty clearly a design decision and probably didn't have anything to do with the graphics downgrade. There are sections later on in the game where you need a torch, so it isn't like they suddenly became incapable of making a pitch black room.
 
This change was pretty clearly a design decision and probably didn't have anything to do with the graphics downgrade. There are sections later on in the game where you need a torch, so it isn't like they suddenly became incapable of making a pitch black room.

Maybe.

If it was a design decision, I'd call it a pretty half-assed one. It was fine before. A single player on his/her own can clear that room without a left hand.
You can back out the doorway and an invisible wall will keep them from following. Take them out one at a time.

Even without
cheesing the hell out of the game design
, a competent player could still clear the room knee deep in the action.
 
The worst thing would be the PC version being exactly like PS3 (plus textures and FPS), and then a month later the announce of the "next-gen" PS4 version that magically makes reappear the old assets.
 
I would be interested to see if a PC mod removes the glow that players give off. So many areas would be much darker and warrant use of the torch if only players did not glow all the time.
 
I would be interested to see if a PC mod removes the glow that players give off. So many areas would be much darker and warrant use of the torch if only players did not glow all the time.

The glow is only a certain size radius. Everything beyond that would still be the same. Although I do think it's silly to have this light radius when I'm outside standing directly in the sun.
 
The worst thing would be the PC version being exactly like PS3 (plus textures and FPS), and then a month later the announce of the "next-gen" PS4 version that magically makes reappear the old assets.

I'm going to dub this the "Tomb Raider Effect". We're never seeing that upgraded version on PC are we?
 
This change was pretty clearly a design decision and probably didn't have anything to do with the graphics downgrade. There are sections later on in the game where you need a torch, so it isn't like they suddenly became incapable of making a pitch black room.

I can't believe this argument is still going, 40 pages later.

We've already seen the upgraded version on PC several times.

Stiiillll speculation
 
The glow is only a certain size radius. Everything beyond that would still be the same. Although I do think it's silly to have this light radius when I'm outside standing directly in the sun.

Some areas you go into just have this weird blue glow. Being able to run down various dark tunnels with a blue glow to help guide you seems odd. I would much prefer them to make players use the torch and increase the number of traps etc so people just don't run around.

I have no idea if the player glow messes up with the actual lighting of the maps in places
 
I'm going to dub this the "Tomb Raider Effect". We're never seeing that upgraded version on PC are we?
Gotta remind people From ported an Xbox game resolution and framerate intact to PC. This is the company that you think will make some new better version for next gen consoles when all they have to do it port over the already complete PC version? Dark Souls 2 running at 60 frames and 1080p on consoles is more than enough to sell it on next gen.They won't do more than they need to.
 
Every time I see this thread near the top of the forum I'm reminded of the article last year where somebody from Bamco said they were going to market this like a AAA game. Yep. At least there's one time we know they weren't lying. And now they're getting the attention and backlash from that sort of marketing.
 
The TV settings thing only crushes the blacks, which probably does make a lot of the game look much better/darker. It's clearly not the actual problem, though (and crushing is never a good solution).
 
This change was pretty clearly a design decision and probably didn't have anything to do with the graphics downgrade.

ilJ8Zyjb5p7Ud.gif


You can really see the shadow difference, even with a grainy youtube video. Trying to find better quality network test footage.

ibvH6ygo7k58mB.png


iPkYcINDzdZ1S.bmp

Exactly. Keep more of these coming. These are just simple shots that show that the lighting engine, among other things, they advertised with is nowhere to be found
 
I might even be ok with never playing a second of Dark Souls II.

Depends if the superior gemoetry and scenery is still in. The demo had plenty of furniture about the place in a scene but downgraded in the console version. Hopefully the PC will have this added original geometry and superior scenery like the demo. Simple things like resolution and framerate won't cut it and neither will just the lighting.

For example
using a Pharros Lockstone in No Man's Wharf was supposed to be a huge deal because it lights up the whole map. But you didn't even need the light because it was never too dark to maneuver without it. So I felt like I wasted my lockstone using it.

This is Colonial Marines territory.

Proof the gameplay was optimized with the lighting in mind. To me this is game-breaking $60 stealing with the gaming press "in on it" keeping silent and not lowering scores. How can you not lower scores for something like that?
 
He supplied convincing evidence. You supplied a crappy rebuttle about cobwebs. This is very comparable to the downgrade of colonial marines.

The game on its own merits doesnt looks OK at times. Which is why we have all this defending BAMCO/FROMSOFT going on. But it doesnt matter how extremely gorgeously badass the game looks like right now. Once again, this thread is about promising a certain build and charging $60 for a completely incomparable product. Is that so hard to understand?

The cobwebs are in fact one of the things that are mentioned in the original post:

Code:
4. Small attention to detail like the cobwebs in the tunnel.

Why is it crappy to mention them? You're being dismissive, while I was simply making a cynical point about it.

There are areas in the game that have noticeably less light-sources and there are differences in textures and details in some parts of the game, in some of which, due to the lighting differences there is a much less dramatic effect and less striking visual impact than what was previously seen in the trailers. This is factual.

With those differences aside, which aren't few, the mechanical part of the game itself remains intact and the gameplay's features are intact and working properly. Given that the gameplay and level design and combat gameplay are, arguably, the most relevant features of the game I don't think the impact of the downgrade is as great as what we saw in Alien's Colonial Marines.

In Aliens: CM not only were the lighting sources changed and reduced, the AI was moronic at best and entire features shown in sections of the demo were completely absent from the final product. Giving that the AI and threatening nature of the creatures in a dim environment were big reasons as to why people were interested in Aliens: CM I think the comparison is unfair.

A better comparison would be to compare Dark Souls 2 to Watch Dogs. The final game doesn't seem to differ wildly from what was originally shown in terms of features, but it has become apparent from the latest videos that the quality does not match the original unveiling. Alien's CM broke the franchise's lore, it eliminated the appeal of being in a stressful hostile environment with some of the scariest creatures ever seen.

There is no evidence that Dark Souls 2's gameplay was severely impacted by the differences in light sources. Some areas don't look as appealing as the demo, for sure, but most of the people who've bought and played the game have been enjoying it and being very vocal about it.

Aliens CM on the other hand has little to no redeeming features. That's why I think comparing the two is an exaggeration, there are better games to draw comparisons from.
 
Depends if the superior gemoetry and scenery is still in. The demo had plenty of furniture about the place in a scene but downgraded in the console version. Hopefully the PC will have this added original geometry and superior scenery like the demo. Simple things like resolution and framerate won't cut it and neither will just the lighting.





Proof the gameplay was optimized with the lighting in mind. To me this is game-breaking $60 stealing with the gaming press "in on it" keeping silent and not lowering scores. How can you not lower scores for something like that?

No chance in hell.
 
<.........> That's why I think comparing the two is an exaggeration, there are better games to draw comparisons from.


Alright, yes I see your point, and I agree with you. I think what needs to be clarified is the graphical letdown is about the same. The Gearbox fuckup was astronomical, and with DSII, we do still have the gameplay largely intact, however, in a moderately buggy state. And that's the major gripe here, is that we were shown a very solid looking game, yet we were basically given a beta in nearly every aspect.
 
Alright, yes I see your point, and I agree with you. I think what needs to be clarified is the graphical letdown is about the same. The Gearbox fuckup was astronomical, and with DSII, we do still have the gameplay largely intact, however, in a moderately buggy state. And that's the major gripe here, is that we were shown a very solid looking game, and we were basically given a beta in nearly every aspect.

You know there have been very few people who have said this regarding this game. The vast majority disagree. Not just in the OT but on reddit and other communities. If the game was this buggy I think I would read more complaints. Guess I have to wait to get my hands on the PC version. Have you played it by the way?
 
Top Bottom