From Software responds to Dark Souls II graphics downgrade concerns

The Lamp said:
Just because you didn't look at pre-launch footage because you like blindly buying your products does NOT mean that the issue at hand is negligible for everyone else, though.

I'm enjoying the game, I have 40 hours into it right now. It is very easy to separate that fact from the fact that I was lied to as a consumer and this is a very disappointing downgrade.
Click to expand...

You need a gaming PC then my friend, because I know for a fact that even if the environments have been changed from the vertical slices we saw initially, it won't be graphically disappointing due to the benefits of higher framerate, higher resolution, higher resolution textures, and perhaps the original lighting engine either via mods or support from From Soft.
 
Garcia said:
I would suggest you resell it and use the money to get the digital version instead.

By playing the disc version you're setting yourself up for a gamble, basically. If you aren't lucky you will stumble upon these (already confirmed by plenty) bugs that are quite abundant:


  • 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)
  • Holes in geometry.
  • Enemies not reacting to the proximity of the player.

Some people have been extremely lucky but for those of us who got the "beta feeling" the problems are a constant.

Edit: Those playing the X360 (retail/full HDD install) and PS3 (digital) versions seem to avoid most of these issues.
Click to expand...

Wow, sounds like I made a good choice to go with the download version on PS3.

I still get inconsistent framerates, obviously, but most of the other stuff does not apply.

One thing I have noticed is that this game seems to very aggressively cull objects that it thinks are not visible. Sometimes you'll see items/enemies disappear when spinning the camera around even though they should still be visible. Luckily it also loads them instantly, so there's no weird performance issues due to that.
 
zephervack said:
More GIFs for people that cant watch Youtube at work or mobile.

This is definitely the "what could have been build", Im gonna go have some tequila now.

http://i.minus.com/i26YYd7dCLzJq.gif[/MG]

[IMG]http://i.minus.com/iTeOUw3PEnq0Q.gif[/MG]

[IMG]http://i.minus.com/ijtu1ZibSW5fi.gif[/MG]


They all come from the amazing video done by HyperBitHero [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFQoLN89_j8[/url][/QUOTE]

Jesus that video. I feel insulted with what they released.
Click to expand...
 
Stinkles said:
Serious question and don't attack me, and this is a serious question but aren't the graphics in DS really secondary to the gameplay and holistic atmosphere (which I understand graphics affect)?
Click to expand...

The point here an d the problem is misleading the customers, false marketing From is doing (and keep doing) selling something different that what they hyped in trailers and screenshots. They showed the game knowing for sure (since they downgraded the game already) it wont be like that form when they release it, they kept shown screenshot in interviews and sites of something they know they cut/downgraded. it's not about how good the game is but the lies they were throwing at people.
 
TimeEffect said:
Christtttttt almighty!! No joke??

I had the armored edition too...

Now im strongly considering to sell it and just buying some other games..
Click to expand...

No joke. Again, it's a coin toss: You will either run into most of those problems or you won't. By going digital you are mostly playing it safe.

The Co-op mechanics of the game basically helped to put myself through the ordeal; multiplayer in Dark Souls II is a-maz-ing.
 
Stinkles said:
Serious question and don't attack me, and this is a serious question but aren't the graphics in DS really secondary to the gameplay and holistic atmosphere (which I understand graphics affect)?
Click to expand...

They are secondary, but if you look at the reveal/TGS footage, you can see that the final game lost a lot of great atmosphere. We aren't talking a few PC elitist effects, the game has been seriously compromised in this regard, and it shows: since the game was designed before that downgrade happened the result is a very uneven experience with some truly ugly areas.

I think DemSouls and DarkSouls were constructed with the limitations of the the phyreengine and the results is a way more cohesive and beautiful experience.

Outside of that, which is my personal stance, we and other people feel deceived. We've been shown a very different game of what the retail is.
 
FairXchange said:
You need a gaming PC then my friend, because I know for a fact that even if the environments have been changed from the vertical slices we saw initially, it won't be graphically disappointing due to the benefits of higher framerate, higher resolution, higher resolution textures, and perhaps the original lighting engine either via mods or support from From Soft.
Click to expand...

I have a gaming PC. I have Dark Souls on PC. That does not change what happened.

That's the problem. You seem to be suggesting that because of your situation that this is a non-issue.

Who knows if the PC version will look as good as the beta and demos did from last year? No one. That's part of the problem. From is being silent about what changes might be present in the PC version. And I personally find the silence worriesome considering the switcheroo they pulled off this month with the console versions.
 
They should delay the PC version and try to hit that reveal target

And release next gen versions alongside it this fall

A man can dream
 
RetroStu said:
I have been watching a playthrough of the orig Dark Souls today and i swear you would think the first game was the sequel, not the other war around. The first game had decent framerate, nice wall textures, tons of wet textures that looked great, lovely lighting etc.
Even items and souls used to glow and light up the area, you can barely see the souls in the sequel.

I honestly don't know what happened with the sequel but it looks awful compared to the first game imo.
Click to expand...

The over bright / washed out look of DS2 (at least on 360) hurts overall presentation alone, the gamma is ramped up to high.

I made my own adjustments to help compensate but not thats something everyone is willing to do or might not even realize they can do (Such as changing the default 360 Reference level setting from Standard to Intermediate from dashboard / settings).
 
animlboogy said:
Here's how I'm starting to see this, though: the changes seem sudden. Some of the most obviously affected areas clearly look as though they were designed for the trueR blacks of the old lighting system.

So if this change was finalized at the 11th hour because they bit off more than they could chew with performance and Namco refused to give them a delay is that lying about anything? Or did this game go gold and preview footage was still fudged?
Click to expand...

Of course it is. In the first place, no game on planet Earth is downgraded at the last possible minute - a game has to go gold, it has to get printed to disc, it has to ship to stores. And Dark Souls 2 had a massive amount of nontrivial downgrades, it's not something that could happen overnight.

So, they had plenty of lead time to warn fans PRIOR to the game's release that they were getting a comically downgraded product, but they didn't. And they kept advertising the new features even after they clearly would have had to have already downgraded the game in order to make it to stores, which is a clear deception with absolutely no possible defense.

As always, it's about reaction. If they apologized, worked to make amends, delivered a quality PC version with these features... people would start to forgive. Instead, they give us this PR? Fuck them.
 
Metroid-Squadron said:
Don't tell me, show me.
Click to expand...

Look at the sequence when he goes to the door. The textures and details like specular maps compared to the TGS footage.

iQouT4P80ziv8.gif


iyTet5QAw3QnV.gif
 
Also for those of you saying Dark Souls II looks worse than DS 1....go back and play Dark Souls on consoles. It looks pretty damn ugly compared to DS II in my opinion. The framerate and resolution difference on PC really makes it more beautiful, so at least we can expect that for DS II, and then you can make the comparison.
 
MMaRsu said:
You seem like a very uninformed gentleman. Or gentlewoman. Either way, you should understand that there is such a thing as false advertising, and that is a punishable offense by the court of law. I am sure none of us will build a lawsuit out of this, but I always put consumer rights first.
Click to expand...

Whew, I'm glad no one here will build a lawsuit out of this. Let's just hope the rest of the litigiously-minded crowd is as benevolent as GAF. Sony was almost ruined from the infamous Game Nerds v. Killlzone 2 Reveal Trailer judgement.. the industry can't take more of this.
 
Amir0x said:
Of course it is. In the first place, no game on planet Earth is downgraded at the last possible minute - a game has to go gold, it has to get printed to disc, it has to ship to stores. And Dark Souls 2 had a massive amount of nontrivial downgrades, it's not something that could happen overnight.

So, they had plenty of lead time to warn fans PRIOR to the game's release that they were getting a comically downgraded product, but they didn't. And they kept advertising the new features even after they clearly would have had to have already downgraded the game in order to make it to stores, which is a clear deception with absolutely no possible defense.

As always, it's about reaction. If they apologized, worked to make ammends, delivered a quality PC version with these features... people would start to forgive. Instead, they give us this PR? Fuck them.
Click to expand...

That leads us to a fuck up in marketing.

Was it deliberate? Cuz outside of PlayStation Access playing the TGS demo again all review builds that the major media outlets received late January were final retail.

They were always showing the PC version up until the netword test.

Yes even when they popped the damn tgs demo into ps3's at TGS.. which is fucked up if true and never clarified
 
DrROBschiz said:
And we think this thread is a shitstorm

If the PC is any less than the TGS demo after this fiasco lmao
Click to expand...

I'm almost willing to make a ban bet with someone that the PC version is going to be the console version with AA and a higher res. None of the shit in the vertical slice will be in there.

Edit: Fuck it I will do the bet. Grief.exe, want to take me up? :)
 
Stoze said:
Also for those of you saying Dark Souls II looks worse than DS 1....go back and play Dark Souls on consoles. It looks pretty damn ugly compared to DS II in my opinion. The framerate and resolution difference on PC really makes it more beautiful, so at least we can expect that for DS II, and then you can make the comparison.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not.

I played Dark Souls on PS3 right after 2.

It looks quite a bit better.Character and Enemy models also look better with higher details.
 
Stoze said:
Also for those of you saying Dark Souls II looks worse than DS 1....go back and play Dark Souls on consoles. It looks pretty damn ugly compared to DS II in my opinion. The framerate and resolution difference on PC really makes it more beautiful, so at least we can expect that for DS II, and then you can make the comparison.
Click to expand...

I played DS1 on my PS3 for the entire week leading up to release of DS2. Still think DS1 looks better.
 
Amir0x said:
But the key thing is this: they advertised this as being the game we were getting until the eve of this game's release, told no one that this downgraded essentially beta product is what we'd be getting instead, and journalists did no one any jobs to fill consumers in either.

They basically straight misled all their fans and thought they could get away with it. THAT is the problem
Click to expand...

and they are still advertising it this way

koryuken said:
I'm almost willing to make a ban bet with someone that the PC version is going to be the console version with AA and a higher res. None of the shit in the vertical slice will be in there.
Click to expand...
Don't because otherwise in both cases you'd have something to be disappointed about.
 
Garcia said:
I would suggest you resell it and use the money to get the digital version instead.

By playing the disc version you're setting yourself up for a gamble, basically. If you aren't lucky you will stumble upon these (already confirmed by plenty) bugs that are quite abundant:


  • 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)
  • Holes in geometry.
  • Enemies not reacting to the proximity of the player.

Some people have been extremely lucky but for those of us who got the "beta feeling" the problems are a constant.

Edit: Those playing the X360 (retail/full HDD install) and PS3 (digital) versions seem to avoid most of these issues.
Click to expand...

I have the PS3 disk version and have only noticed the loading and framerate problems. Where are the holes in geometry?
 
animlboogy said:
Well... When did the game go gold? I'm saying that since the bulk of the changes appear related to the lighting being gutted, I think this absolutely could have been a literal last minute change before going gold.

I just read all the extra content that comes with the Divinity 2 developer's cut. Anybody interested in game development should go through that stuff. It is shocking how much happens up until the moment a game goes gold, especially with very malleable things like dumping quests because you don't have QA time left and just shoving a bunch of monsters into an area as an alternative. Or lowering the resolution of textures. Or yes, turning off effects that have issues QA doesn't have time to help sort out with the final day looming.

I'm not saying that Namco wasn't deceptive, but I don't necessarily believe a lot of the reasoning in this thread. Enemy placements being changed, or lighting being turned off and left flat are being used as proof that this was an intentional fleecing of customers. Now, maybe it was exactly that, but from my meager knowledge as a fan and someone who has played with various dev tools before in a rudimentary way, I don't buy those reasons as "proof" of anything.
Click to expand...

Let me put it another way. Even in the most generous possible scenario, and I do mean the most generous, the game has to go gold at least 3 to 4 weeks prior to it hitting stores. inFamous: Second Son for example went gold and the announcements went out around February 26, and it is releasing March 21. Ok, now, let's assume for the sake of your most generous possible scenario, that it was basically like flipping a switch. It still would have required at least a week or so development time to truly implement all the changes and test them, and again I'm putting this on some bonkers speed boat test that doesn't line up at all with how most development actually works.

So, now, we have at least a month + a few weeks lead time to stores where someone would have had to make a decision that the lighting engine would not function as-is on last-gen consoles, and then put it into lightning speed development, and then get the game gold, printed and into stores. So, again, no matter how optimistic your scenario, they had at least a month to warn consumers about what they were going to get. And yet, in that time, even past the time when they clearly would have had to make the decision to downgrade, they were advertising these features as still being in the game (edit: and apparently still are, holy fuck!). Do you genuinely not see the problem here?
 
Stoze said:
Also for those of you saying Dark Souls II looks worse than DS 1....go back and play Dark Souls on consoles. It looks pretty damn ugly compared to DS II in my opinion. The framerate and resolution difference on PC really makes it more beautiful, so at least we can expect that for DS II, and then you can make the comparison.
Click to expand...

Currently going through a 2nd. Dark Souls run only for comparisons sake and Dark Souls 1 destroys 2 in art direction.
 
The fact that the screens on the back of the box are from the better looking versions should be enough to stop FROM defenders right in there tracks.

Please, someone who is siding with FROM on this, please explain to me how you view this as an ethical business practice, and not an unethical one.
 
Oh man, I really hope the PC version looks at least as good as the first one. I'm still playing it almost every day and it looks amazing.
 
swazzyswess said:
Whew, I'm glad no one here will build a lawsuit out of this. Let's just hope the rest of the litigiously-minded crowd is as benevolent as GAF. Sony was almost ruined from the infamous Game Nerds v. Killlzone 2 Reveal Trailer judgement.. the industry can't take more of this.
Click to expand...

Oh, but it could happen, you know?

Also, you should be on the side of the consumer (for your own good).
 
DrROBschiz said:
????

Where

All the major outlet coverage has been retail since late January including the mixed footage in the launch trailer
Click to expand...

on their website for example, or their official youtube channel.
if I want to buy the ps3 version on amazon.com there are 38 screenshots for me to see what the game looks like but none of them are actual ps3 gameplay footage
 
I think people are wrong about the false advertising accusations. It has more to do with changing the gameplay than pulling a bait and switch. All the dynamic torch lighting is still there, it's just no longer necessary, I believe it's because they decided against making so much of the game a Tomb of Giants rehash, and/or difficulty balancing the challenge of traversing areas minus shield. Beta was too dark, atmospheric yes, but game play suffered imo. I think they did a bit of crude fix upping the brightness on interiors which look a bit flat now. If you light the torch they look stellar.
 
Persona7 said:
I have the PS3 disk version and have only noticed the loading and framerate problems. Where are the holes in geometry?
Click to expand...

Likewise. So far only those issues. I'm on a newer slim PS3. As for the comments about art direction being better in 1 versus 2. Opinions. I prefer the look and area of part 2 to 1, but still loved 1.
 
Hi-Scores_ said:
I think people are wrong about the false advertising accusations. It has more to do with changing the gameplay than pulling a bait and switch. All the dynamic torch lighting is still there, it's just no longer necessary, I believe it's because they decided against making so much of the game a Tomb of Giants rehash. Beta was too dark, atmospheric yes, but game play suffered imo. I think they did a bit of crude fix upping the brightness on interiors which look a bit flat now. If you light the torch they look stellar.
Click to expand...

No, is not.

Not only is way more flat, there are way less light sources and way less dynamic shadows.
 
HeelPower said:
the game can look really good sometimes and really poor in others = laziness imo

It could have all looked good.
Click to expand...

I promise you that any individual who has the devotion to make it into a games industry which is incredibly over-saturated with talent and land a job at a highly praised studio like FROM is not lazy.
 
Seanspeed said:
Surprised at all the people who say they aren't going to get this now, or will wait.

Goes to show that graphics truly are what's most important to a lot of people.

I'm not trying to defend what FROM has done either. It sucks, I'm not happy about it, but its still fucking Dark Souls 2. No way I'm gonna wait around. Durante wont be able to do shit about a different lighting system and replaced textures and assets and whatnot.
Click to expand...

This. And I honestly don't think it looks worse than the first Dark Souls on consoles. I think people are just recalling it and not actually going back to look at it. I put the game in to check and I really don't think the first Dark Souls looks better or much better than this one. This particular developer couldn't pull something like this off on the consoles. And it's not N64 graphics like ppl are saying for whatever reason. Telling people not to buy the game is like saying "We rather prove a point than have another Dark Souls game" to me. I rather show them that these games are what we want. I'm sure this is their last time making one on last-gen, so the next game should look pretty awesome.
 
Relaxed Muscle said:
That reminds me...I hope the saves will still work after the change.
Click to expand...

Gbraga said:
I better finish my DEX playthrough before then. Maybe I'll wait until it gets removed before I start my Ultra Greatsword build just to be safe.
Click to expand...

Keep your saves backed up, but they should be fine. Worst case scenario, someone will come up with a save fix much like the Arkham Games.

I want to just start fresh and work my way up through the achievements.
 
Relaxed Muscle said:
No, is not.

Not only is way more flat, there are way less light sources and way less dynamic shadows.
Click to expand...

Sorry but how is it not? Walking down a darkened corridor with torch shows the surface texture and shadows on walls which otherwise look flat. Explain how walls etc literally look straight flat when walking with torch. The light and shadows still bounce around the room moving with the player constantly at least to my eyes.
 
animlboogy said:
Huge difference between laziness and having to hit a release date. That's a really shitty word to use for a team that was probably putting in 18 hour days for months.
Click to expand...

The lack of respect for developers around GAF (and the internet gaming community as a whole) as of late is sickening, IMO.

Dark Souls had several rough/unfinished areas too. Demon's Souls had far less physical landscape in general. It's certainly a combination of lack of resources and time, but calling people who put in thousands and thousands of hours to make a product for others to enjoy "lazy" is repulsive. Especially games that are ultimately this fucking great.
 
Game developers do need to be called out for this type crap. by the time a game is shown to the public to build hype and then be a very real visual downgrade is treating gamers with no respect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dark souls 1 lovers… how soon do you do… what you need to do? Example:
2
59
374
CrimsonTide replied
  • Poll
Duskbloods or Nightreign from software online??
Poll Analysis Hype  2
59
741
GigaBowser replied
Is Dark Souls 1 the best game this century? Ever?
2 3 4
195
5K
Soapbox Killer replied
That Badass Dark Souls TV trailer
1
434
IAmRei replied
The Duskbloods IP owned by From Software
News 
1
390
Darkkahn replied
Top Bottom